[arch-general] Bugs again

Xavier shiningxc at gmail.com
Fri May 15 03:58:47 EDT 2009

On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Damjan Georgievski <gdamjan at gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry to bring this again,  but something has to change in the way
> bugs are handled in Arch.
> I've open this bug report http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/13905 about
> the awesome package in community.
> The package maintainer just closes the bug, not solving it, claiming
> it's upstream, and not even investigating the problem. He suggests I
> ask upstream.
> Ok, I play a good citizen, I do ask upstream, we find the problem, a
> sollution is found - it turns out the PKGBUILD was wrong from the
> begining - but still I submit a patch to awesome so that building it
> is much easier.
> I request reopening the bug .. it's a small text-area, not very
> usable, so I just write "New information" .. since the bug was closed
> with "You may want to ask upstream why they install those files by
> default.".
> And then I get the answer:
> Reason for denial:
> You need to be more specific that "New information" in a reopen request...
> Now, it's not like I enjoy hanging out in the bug system opening bugs,
> investigating them, hoping to improve ArchLinux's packages.. and I
> don't see how I could've deserved this behaviour.
> The bug report shouldn't have been closed in the first place, since
> the problem was not even solved.

To sum up, pressh did a wrong move by closing this bug without waiting
for the investigation.

Then what you did was perfect, investigating the issue upstream and
coming up with a fix.

Now you should just have summed up in the reopen request :
"an improvement to the build system will be available in next upstream
release, which will require an update to the PKGBUILD, so please

It's really not a big deal, bugs get closed wrongly sometimes, we all
do mistakes.
Just argue why in the reopen request and everything will go well :)

More information about the arch-general mailing list