> [alt.barcodes removed, since this is about Perl process]
(Not necessarily so.)
[...]
>> BTW, there's a longstanding bug filed at the CPAN RT [2] (along with
>> a patch.) However, it appears to be filed against libwww-perl,
>> while it actually belongs to Net-HTTP.
>> The question is: how do I reassign it?
>> [2]
https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=29468
> You can't; in fact, it looks like the way
rt.cpan.org is set up noone
> can move a ticket from one queue to another. The best you could do
> is file a separate bug against Net-HTTP, referencing the LWP bug; but
> since both dists are maintained by Gisle Aas I'm not sure there'd be
> much point.
... Which only makes it more surprising that it wasn't already
dealt with. (Especially given the simplicity of the patch.)
[...]
>> * the issue may indeed be specific to the distribution's build;
>> (naturally, building from the upstream sources for every bug being I
>> report just to check that it wasn't introduced by the packagers is
>> hardly an option.)
> Obviously you have a different approach from me. I would consider
> building the latest upstream release from source, and probably the
> latest upstream equivalent of CVS HEAD, a basic prerequisite for
> reporting a bug. After all, it's almost certainly the first thing
> you'll be asked to do in any case, and a patch which doesn't apply to
> HEAD is probably nearly worthless.
Depending on the goals, it may or may not make sense to ever get
involved with the latest development version.
For instance, I'm occasionally employed by a local university,
to carry over certain computer-related courses (mostly
short-term.) Should I discover an issue while preparing for
them, I'm most likely to report it to the developers. However,
distracting myself to write a patch -- which is unlikely to be
incorporated into the distribution I'll use (and recommend to
the students) by the time the courses will start -- may bring no
good to the courses themselves. In this case, clearly
documenting the issue and providing a work-around for the
students to use may constitute a better solution.
Similarly, while maintaining a few hosts under my
responsibility, I'd try to stick to the distribution-provided
software whenever possible, preferably the "stable" branch.
Given that patches other than security fixes won't generally be
accepted into Debian "stable," and that there're typically a
couple of years between releases...
Yet, indeed, I've made a few contributions to some Git HEADs.
(Most recently libtasn1, IIRC.)
> I suppose that in principle 'I'm using a distro; I'm paying them (or
> not) to sort out whose bug it is and get it fixed upstream' ought to
> be a reasonable argument, but in practice distros tend to be
> extremely unreliable about sending bugs upstream, probably because
> they have had their own share of flaky upstreams to deal with.
The best thing about Debian is that it's a community-based
project. (Which was the reason for me to choose it in the first
place.) Basically, the only privileges that the Debian
Developer status conveys are: to upload, and to vote.
Essentially, anyone (careful enough not to disrupt the
established order) is welcome to do this (or any other, for that
matter) part of the job. Why, (taking a glance over the latest
upstream stable releases) I've just forwarded Debian Bug#700617
and #700618 to CPAN RT#84467 and #84468, respectively.
(Hopefully, I did the thing right; this time.)
Indeed, these are set correctly in the current META.json.
>
search.cpan.org will honour these fields if they are present, so the
> 'View/Report Bugs' link on the page for Convert-ASN1 will take you to
> that github bugtracker. I don't believe there is currently any
> support for forwarding the bug-*@
rt.cpan.org emails, though; this is
> at least in part because modules often outlive their original
> authors, and having somewhere to track bugs once the author has
> disappeared is useful.
My point is that GitHubs come and go, but the code remains.
Certainly, I'd prefer a service that could be easily "cloned,"
such as a Usenet newsgroup, a Git archive, or similar.
The Perl-based App::SD was intended to be just such a system.
Alas, it has seen virtually no development from mid-2011 to
late-2012. The situation seem to be slowly improving, though.