Comment 20 for bug 1821251

> The bug linked in the changelog of the SRU is this one, not bug #1906541.

Indeed, I am not sure of the proper formatting rules, considering this was my first merge request followed by SRU request of upstream changes. The upstream changelog included the details of the original owner along with this LP# considering the fix originated here.

> The SRU template needs to be on this bug

How should this be handled as of now? By who?

> in general, we should not be opening separate bugs for an SRU

In this case, this bug ticket is marked for multiple packages. It seemed more straight-forward to me for the individual changes to be split off in a separate ticket for the SRU itself. Would, instead, multiple SRU templates be expected on this ticket - one for each package? Or would the SRU potentially change depending on the changes required in the individual packages?

This process is fairly scary from the outside perspective as these real life scenarios are not covered. Considering this bug has not been fixed for one-and-a-half years, with a patch laying around, I was trying to get the ball rolling. I do ask once again for actionable items as of now, or clarity of whether something should be done whatsoever (as it may instead be handled in other communication channels without information visible to the 'outside world').