Quoting Adam Spiers
Preferably there is a bnc (or an upstream bug tracker reference). There are cases where this does not make sense (e.g. when you backport a git commited fix to a package, and that did not have a bug report assigned; creating one for the sake of the ID is useless).
The case I encountered is where there was only a patch and a bug filed in another distribution (Arch), not upstream.
An interesting case and unfortunately something I see a lot with other dists: they often do not care to forward patches to upstream. If the bug is real, and upstream is alive and kicking, I would recommend to file a bug in the upstream tracker of the respective project and make sure they are aware of this.. this is a simple responsibility I derive from GPL :) (ok, the GPL asks us to distribute the sources of the modification.. I favor that such modifications flow back into the upstream code base whenever they make sense).
Thanks, this is all very useful information. But it also confirms that a) there is essential information missing from the wiki page, and b) I am not yet knowledgeable enough in this area to fix that. So I would much prefer if you could correct the wiki page rather than posting the information here, where it will rapidly get forgotten about / buried in the list archives ...
I generally have a huge pain writing wiki pages that make sense to others than myself :( As can be seen in the paragraphs cited by you :) Any volunteers to help out here? Dominique -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org