Am 03.07.2013 19:54, schrieb Kevin Fenzi: > On Wed, 03 Jul 2013 19:38:00 +0200 > Reindl Harald <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> a new upstream-release does not implicitly close any bug >> >> on the other hand it makes hardly sense to hold back a update >> not fixing all bugreports - this all makes no sense for me > > I think there's a misunderstanding here. > > Bodhi doesn't do anything at all with bugs that are not attached to an > update. How could it? > > The bugs that are attached to an update are supposed to be fixed by > that update. If they are not, you should -1 karma the update and if > possible note in the bug that it's not fixed and help provide any info > to the maintainer in bug. > > If the update has some bugs attached, but doesn't fix a bug that is NOT > attached, you should NOT -1 karma for that bug not being fixed. It's > not expected that it would be. You could note in that bug that the > update doesn't fix it, but the maintainer probibly knows that or they > would have also attached that bug to the update. > > Bodhi will (by default, but override able) close any bugs attached to > an update when the update goes stable. If you find such a closed but > that was not really fixed, reopen it or note to the maintainer in the > bug and they can do so. > > Is that more clear? this makes much more sense thanks!
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
