I am quite upset by the thumbs down I got here and here. Please see my comments in both places.

Can someone review the whole bugtracker thing with the testers please?

Have you tried to send private message or email message to that guy?
http://talk.maemo.org/member.php?u=29278
Weird behaviour or just plain mistake.

not the first time just confirmed. bugtracker works fine.

Hmm. Maybe he is reading this:
http://wiki.maemo.org/Extras-testing...klist#Blockers
literally...but then he would be right :|

https://bugs.maemo.org or your email. No mention about garage or talk.

.edit
And btw. my little off topic here was probably misunderstood. I meant really WHY there is no even HINT in wiki that you can start "[Announce] yourpplicationhere" to talk. Is it something that developers just see here going in application area wild and THEN maybe put their announce there?

I have fixed the wiki to explicitly include garage bugtrackers and talk.maemo.org threads.

This bugtracker thing is going to be the death of me... Never caused a lesser component bigger fuss.

@qole: patience, the votes can be changed now, we'll resolve this. The first link is 100% OK, the second one is slightly disputable (curse them inconclusive lists) but personally I'd say it's OK

Aha, I think the problem is that older versions of my package (including the one currently in Extras) had a broken bugtracker field (due to a bug in py2deb), and the testers are getting confused.

If you look at the package overview pages of my two projects, here and here, you will see that the bugtracker link is the link from the Extras package, not from the Extras-testing package.

It must be made clear to testers that they are looking at the fields on the package instance page, not the overview page.

Weirdly, the download pages on maemo.org (where my packages are 2nd and 3rd most popular right now ) have the proper bugtracker field from the Extras-testing version. There's definitely some inconsistency there.

There's a better thread for my discussion over here. That thread mentions a wiki page that covers the range of valid bugtrackers, and my bugtracker fields fall into that page's definitions.

My "in the end you can only accept it" was meant as a "in the end, you can only accept people as they are" - in direct reply to slender's "Why would anyone promote to extras-testing if he/she would not want to eventually go to extras?". obviously, there's developers out there who put packages into -testing without *really* wanting them to be promoted to extras. i cannot understand it but this is what i have to accept.

speaking of what we have to accept:

from a community point of view - and an end users point of view - i'm 100% on your side. we needn't and mustn't accept developers breaking the rules and getting away with it.

this one example made me think, though. i want the packages in extras, they're important. i first thought testing means judging. then i thought it means judging and helping with little details. now i wonder if it maybe also includes convincing. finding acceptable compromises.

i didn't vote the package down. didn't vote it up, either. i really don't know what to do at the moment.

<necro>think this belongs in here...</necro>

would it be a good idea to force people who thumb down in the QA department to leave a comment?

just got a thumb down without any explanation at http://maemo.org/packages/package_in...mel/fmms/1.0.3, which is completely useless as i have no idea what is wrong or what i can do to fix it :/