On 2013-07-03 2:28, Ian Malone wrote:
Tooling issues aside (and it is undesireable that bugs should get marked fixed if they haven't been) I think this rule is wrong under a strict reading. If an update claims to fix two bugs and fixes neither then neither is the *only* change (highlighting is on the guidelines page), yet obviously the rationale for this rule does not apply in that case.
I was kinda hoping people would be able to draw the obvious interpretation there. That page (like just about everything I write...) is too long already, I really don't want to make it any longer.
Pedantry aside, there is another case: where the update is meant to fix a bug and the maintainer has tried to do this by pulling in an upstream update that might not otherwise have been picked up (e.g. a git hash which has added a feature in the process of fixing the bug). The upstream update might be part of the change, but it was not the purpose of the change.
I'm not sure what conclusion you're drawing here? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
