Simple Scan

Bug #897469
Comment #32

Comment 32 for bug 897469

Revision history for this message

Tim Abell (tim-abell) wrote on 2013-02-07:

#32

Hi, Thanks for the info. I've read up on the SRU process for getting this fix included in the LTS repo, and before that can be started it is apparently a prerequisite that this bug be marked as "Fix Released", whereas it is currently "Fix Committed".

I can't work out from the info on this project whether the bugfix is in simple-scan's latest release so don't know if that can be satisfied.

Also required is the following (quote):

* An explanation of the bug on users and justification for backporting the fix to the stable release. This may be preceded with an [Impact] header, but this is not required. In addition, it is helpful, but not required, to include an explanation of how the upload fixes this bug.
* A [Test Case] section with detailed instructions how to reproduce the bug. These should allow someone who is not familiar with the affected package to reproduce the bug and verify that the updated package fixes the problem.
* A [Regression Potential] section with a discussion of how regressions are most likely to manifest as a result of this change. It is assumed that any SRU candidate patch is well-tested before upload and has a low overall risk of regression, but it's important to make the effort to think about what could happen in the event of a regression. This both shows the SRU team that the risks have been considered, and provides guidance to testers in regression-testing the SRU.

This information is from: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Procedure

I don't think it's my place to make these changes, so perhaps someone from the project could look into this?

Once that is done I think I can continue the SRU process as it looks to me like this bug satisfies the SRU requirements based on this example: "Bugs which may, under realistic circumstances, directly cause a loss of user data"

Many Thanks

---
* Fix Committed: a developer has committed his/her fix to the project's codebase.
* Fix Released: a new version of the software, featuring the bug fix, has been released.
ref: https://wiki.kubuntu.org/Bugs/WorkFlow

I can't work out from the info on this project whether the bugfix is in simple-scan's latest release so don't know if that can be satisfied.

Also required is the following (quote):

* An explanation of the bug on users and justification for backporting the fix to the stable release. This may be preceded with an [Impact] header, but this is not required. In addition, it is helpful, but not required, to include an explanation of how the upload fixes this bug.
 * A [Test Case] section with detailed instructions how to reproduce the bug. These should allow someone who is not familiar with the affected package to reproduce the bug and verify that the updated package fixes the problem.
* A [Regression Potential] section with a discussion of how regressions are most likely to manifest as a result of this change. It is assumed that any SRU candidate patch is well-tested before upload and has a low overall risk of regression, but it's important to make the effort to think about what could happen in the event of a regression. This both shows the SRU team that the risks have been considered, and provides guidance to testers in regression-testing the SRU.

This information is from: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Procedure

I don't think it's my place to make these changes, so perhaps someone from the project could look into this?

Many Thanks