1 |
(I asked this on IRC more than an hour ago, got no reply, so here goes |
2 |
it to the list.) |
3 |
|
4 |
What's the policy when you think that a change made due to a FIXED bug |
5 |
needs more changes? Should you just comment it, fill another bug or |
6 |
change the state (I can't do the later, anyway)? |
7 |
|
8 |
As an example (the one I am dealing with, bug 283744), I found out a |
9 |
package was changed to add a behavior which wasn't documented in the |
10 |
ebuild. |
11 |
|
12 |
On one hand, the suggestion to add elog messages should belong to the |
13 |
original bug (now RESOLVED FIXED). |
14 |
|
15 |
But on the other hand this is a new problem introduced by the fix for |
16 |
that first bug, and then should have its own request. |
17 |
|
18 |
(And, as I can't change the first bug - which is FIXED, a separate bug |
19 |
would be initially marked as OPEN, which suits the case of a new, IMHO |
20 |
still unsolved issue.) |
21 |
|
22 |
But what's the most polite thing to do? |
23 |
|
24 |
-- |
25 |
Nuno J. Silva |
26 |
gopher://sdf-eu.org/1/users/njsg |