s...@pobox.com writes: > […] I got a hit on an Ubuntu bug tracker about a SpamBayes bug. As it > turns out, Ubuntu distributes an outdated (read: no longer maintained) > version of SpamBayes. The bug had been fixed over three years ago in > the current version. Had I known this I could probably have saved them > some trouble, at least by suggesting that they upgrade.
If the maintainer of Ubuntu's spambayes knew it was a bug in the upstream package, but failed to contact upstream (the SpamBayes team), the maintainer of Ubuntu's spambayes isn't doing their job properly IMO. > I have a question for you people who develop and maintain Python-based > packages. How closely, if at all, do you monitor the bug trackers of > Linux distributions (or Linux-like packaging systems like MacPorts) > for activity related to your packages? Not at all. If someone uses code, finds a bug in that code, thinks the bug should be addressed in that code upstream, it's their responsibility to report that using the contact details and/or bug tracker provided. For OS distributions, that means the package maintainers are responsible for reporting the bug upstream if it's suspected or determined to be a bug in the upstream code base. > How do you encourage such projects to push bug reports and/or fixes > upstream to you? Make the bug tracker and/or contact email address available at the same location where the code itself is obtained. Be responsive to whomever reports bugs using those channels. Track the bug reports effectively and reliably. -- \ “I'm beginning to think that life is just one long Yoko Ono | `\ album; no rhyme or reason, just a lot of incoherent shrieks and | _o__) then it's over.” —Ian Wolff | Ben Finney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
