Mono packages

Christopher Aillon caillon at redhat.com
Sun Mar 12 15:14:34 UTC 2006


On 03/12/2006 03:38 AM, Paul F. Johnson wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>> Actual references would be nice.
> 
> bugzilla.ximian.com/show_bug.cgi?id=77731 (FC BZ #184389)
> bugzilla.ximian.com/show_bug.cgi?id=77732 (FC BZ #184390)
> bugzilla.ximian.com/show_bug.cgi?id=77733 (FC BZ #184391)
> bugzilla.ximian.com/show_bug.cgi?id=77734 (FC BZ #184409)
> 
> The last one hasn't been addressed yet. The other three have.

I'm not sure why you're all up in arms.  Two of your bugs have been 
resolved NOTABUG, one has not been resolved as you mentioned, and 
there's the lone bug that was actually bug and has been fixed upstream, 
and was fixed a bit ago.  Is it not fixed in 1.1.13.4-2?  You reported 
with an old version, and there was a new mono release since.  It appears 
to be a minor issue, with no real hint as to what the patch is in any of 
the bugs.  I just looked around in mono SVN and couldn't find it, 
either.  How do you expect us to be able to do anything with that?

Also, who advised you to cross-bugzilla?  I'm a bit confused why you'd 
do that, so is the FC maintainer, and the ximian maintainer...  If you 
have a ximian account, reporting there is preferred.    Development 
should always happen upstream and trickle downstream to vendors, but we 
have releases to tend to and if there is a blocker that actually breaks 
core or extras packages, by all means please file with us with a pointer 
to the fix if you want better attention.




More information about the fedora-extras-list mailing list