On Sat 29 Apr 2017 at 14:29:19 +0200, Felix Dietrich wrote: > Jonathan Dowland <j...@debian.org> writes: > > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 02:53:28AM +0200, Felix Dietrich wrote: > > > When closing, annote the bug with found/fixed version information. > > If you are using the bts command-line helper, you could do > > (for the ficftional bug number ABCDEF, which was found in a version > > 2016.15-4, and fixed in a version 2017.4-1): > > > > bts found ABCDEF 2016.15-4 , fixed it 2017.4-1 , done it 2017.4-1 > > I hadn't come across that helper program, yet. Thank you. > > > At the end of the day, if the maintainer disagrees, they can reopen the > > bug. > > I followed Ben Finney's advice and sent an email to the report > requesting information regarding the current state of it. I will wait > awhile for a response before I am going to close the bug report.
While you are there you could consider closing the five wishlist reports. All are from 2009/2010. 7/8 years has passed and no one has stepped forward to respond significantly to these enhancement requests. They are highly unlikely to be fulfilled; the reports serve no purpose. Has upstream altered the software to accomodate them? How likely is it that anyone will? The reports will linger in the BTS for the forseeable future. Their disappearence will not reflect on the quality of Debian or the good intentions of the submitters. Get rid of the reports. Suppose 100 readers of this list did the same for 5 other packages each. That would be 2500 closed bugs. Then the same readers get carried away and look at the other bugs in their chosen packages. Where could this end? 25,000 closed bugs? It doesn't happen until users make it happen. Maintainers can only do so much. -- Brian.
