Unarchive the following likely erroneously archived bugs

Paul Gevers elbrus at debian.org
Mon Dec 18 19:22:31 UTC 2017

Hi Don,

On 18-12-17 20:15, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Dec 2017, Paul Gevers wrote:
>> On 17-12-17 22:53, Don Armstrong wrote:
>>> On Sun, 17 Dec 2017, Paul Gevers wrote:
>>>> Do you know why 818241 doesn't get archived (and can't be manually
>>>> archived)? It is a tiny bit in the way.
>>> brltty     | 5.3.1-1        | unstable                | source, kfreebsd-amd64, kfreebsd-i386
>>> That's basically why; not sure why that version hasn't been updated.
>> Thanks a bunch. I didn't know this was one of the checks.
>> Anyways, those are non-release architectures. Isn't it smarter to not
>> take those into account?
> The real issue is that archiving bugs tends to make them fall off of the
> radar completely. I'm not sure why kfreebsd aren't keeping up, though.

Well, it doesn't help that we are not aware that that is the reason. The
bts doesn't tell us. All I see is an old bug that doesn't get archived.

There is probably something wrong in the packaging of brltty that causes
4 non-release archs to FTBFS with a recent version. It would help more
if a wishlist bug about that would be opened instead of an unrelated bug
does not get archived.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-a11y-devel/attachments/20171218/973195cb/attachment.sig>

More information about the Pkg-a11y-devel mailing list