On Thu, Feb 03, 2000 at 09:35:09PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Le Thu, Feb 03, 2000 at 08:07:37PM +0100, Thierry Laronde écrivait: > > Hello, > > Hi, > > > I have made a bit of cleaning in the BTS about the bugs open against > > util-linux. > > With Vincent benediction ? Anyway if what you did is right then nobody > will complain. :) >
I hope so. I have, first, sent mails to him. After some days, without any replies, I have considered that "no reply is agreement". But I have limited myself to the obvious cases, and have explained the decisions. Personnaly, I would make more cleaning, but the cases are less "clear". So I let the maintainer do what he has to. > > The problem is that 15 (>25%) bugs are against `hwclock' alone. The most > > obvious lack is about documentation (we've been discuting this in the > > `Scary bugs' thread). > > > > What is the Debian-QA advice about this ? IMHO, it would be more easy to > > handle a small package, and to work hard on the documentation, than keeping > > a lot of very useful and used utilities merged, increasing the bugs against > > one package, and making hard for the maintainer to have a synthetic view of > > the problem, when a lot of problems reported are not software problems, but > > "user's" problems because of a missing documentation. > > No, the good solution is to provide a patch to the upstream maintainer > in order to include better documentation in the upstream source, this will > increase the quality for everybody not only Debian. For debian specific > documentation I guess that Vincent welcomes patches ... Well, I am working with Laurent Picouleau about the `time' problem. And I think that we will able to supply some documentation for woody. At this moment, we'll give this to Vincent, closing several bugs by the way. Best regards, -- Thierry LARONDE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> website : http://www.polynum.com /home du SDF (Site Debian Francophone) : http://www.polynum.com/debian
