On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 3:53 AM, philinux <pc_blackb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Semantic quibbling. You might like not liike the reasons I see where bug filing status is important - the latter was only meant to be a suggestion why wishilst is preferred to omisison. Raising the issue is or may be more important, of course. It is clearly not my desire or intent to decide what the status is, but I wanted to be clear as to why I'd choose one status over the other. It is not relavant at all now that Karmic is in beta release. It of course is a valid to the extent that some poople like to use acrobat reader. Ubuntu by definition cannot legally provide Acrobat per se. That in effect could just mark the status of the bug invalid. Preferable here to get the package in a few weeks (by live in ca 12 days we can reopen the issue. Finding a good repository that gives me a working up to date acrobat reader is of course beneficial to the community. We can't predict that now. And because it is unsupported I see now the status of the bug marked as invalid by developers, but comments raised with more authority than me (Ubuntu Development team, that sort of thing, or whoever may maintain acroread when Karmic goes live. getting the maintainer of a package is basically trivial in Ubuntu as in any modern distribution that is open source (god help those who are unable to ask people such questions, of course, but I think he is subscribing to the bug. I shall of course listen to him... :) -- thanks for letting me change the magnetic patterns on your hard disk. -- Karmic 64 bit: Package acroread is missing from partner repo https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/437566 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
