> > No, all bugs should be reported to Debian ... > I don't think that we should be in the business of telling anyone where > they should submit their bug reports. If the user wishes to deal with > the upstream developers directly, that is his or her prerogative.
Of course, but Debian has a way to work that involves receiving bug reports. Debian developers should encourage users to report bugs to us. The idea of "if it's a bug in the software -> upstream, if it's Debian packaging -> Debian BTS" it's wrong and users shouldn't be told that. > > ... (with the exception of a few very actively developed - alpha/beta > > quality packages like mozilla). > True, and I would like to add a comment. I maintain some packages that > come in two versions: a stable "released" version, and a "developer's" > version. In the package description of the developer's version, I > clearly state that *I* do not support this software. I will support > the released version, but the user installs the developer's version at > his own risk. (I don't have time to fix bugs in code that changes so > frequently.) Therefore, I encourage users of this version to report > all bugs upstream, where active development is taking place. This is > more efficient, since communication doesn't get bogged down with our > BTS. (And believe me, in the years I've been a developer, I've seen > communication get bogged down because of forwarding DBTS reports.) > > IMHO, this is a case in which it is entirely appropriate to skip our > BTS, and I hope that you agree. Yes, I agree. But this applies in just a few cases.
