Launchpad itself

searching for adobe-flashplugin package shows summary for jaunty-backports project

Asked by Eliah Kagan

When I search for the Ubuntu package adobe-flashplugin (using the text box at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu), I get this as my search result:

adobe-flashplugin
This project is for requesting, processing, testing, and coordinating packages in the jaunty-backports repository. Information on how to effectively contribute can be found at https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBackports Please read the "How To Request Backports" section before requesting a backport
Available in: hardy, lucid, maverick, natty

Actually clicking the link to go to that search result (which was the only search result) brought me to https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/adobe-flashplugin, which has no corresponding summary text because it has no upstream connection.

I wondered why the search result for the adobe-flashplugin package showed this seemingly unrelated (or only peripherally related) summary, so I searched Google for the (quoted) text of the first sentence of that description, and found https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/jaunty/+source/adobe-flashplugin, which (as is to be expected) has Jaunty Jackalope Backports (https://launchpad.net/jaunty-backports / https://launchpad.net/jaunty-backports/trunk) as its upstream connection.

So it seems that when an Ubuntu package has no upstream connection itself but has one in some Ubuntu release, the description from the upstream connection is given in the Launchpad search result for that package. (Or perhaps this is not a valid generalization, and I have simply stumbled upon some weird glitch in Launchpad's search engine.) In this case, and I would think in a number of others, this is very confusing.

Is this a known issue? Has it been reported as a bug in Launchpad itself? Should I report it as a bug? Or is it because of something wrong with the adobe-flashplugin metadata that I'm not aware of? Or is it considered intended behavior?

Question information

Language:
English Edit question
Status:
Solved
For:
Launchpad itself Edit question
Assignee:
No assignee Edit question
Solved by:
Gary Poster
Solved:
Last query:
Last reply:

This question was reopened

Revision history for this message
Gary Poster (gary) said : 		#1

I think this is a new bug (filed as bug 809485). Thank you for the report.

Revision history for this message
Eliah Kagan (degeneracypressure) said : 		#2

Thanks Gary Poster, that solved my question.

Revision history for this message
Eliah Kagan (degeneracypressure) said : 		#3

@Gary Poster
Do you still believe this is a bug? If so, can you provide the information requested by William Grant in bug 809485 (and mark bug back from Expired to New or Incomplete, as appropriate)? If not, is there anything else that should be done about this (and can bug 809485 be marked Invalid)? The original problem does not appear to exist anymore--it seems that https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/jaunty/+source/adobe-flashplugin no longer has jaunty-backports as an upstream connection.

Revision history for this message
Best Gary Poster (gary) said : 		#4

Hello Eliah.

William knows more about this than I, and I was and am simply inclined to trust his judgement and move on. That said, if his reply and the bug's expiry make you think that we are making a mistake, please reopen the bug and add a comment. On the other hand, if you also agree with him that this is not a bug, from my perspective "Expired" is as good as "Invalid" so I see no need to change it; but if you wanted to change it that would be fine.

If you wanted to reopen the bug report, I would suggest rephrasing the problem (as a bug comment) in terms of a "what I expected" and "what happened" pattern. For instance, your comment might look something like this.

"""
To duplicate (this is guesswork):
- Make a package for an older release of the Ubuntu distribution. Include text pertinent to the distribution and not the package.
- Stop distributing the package in a newer release of the distribution.
- Search for the package on https://launchpad.net/ubuntu .

What I happened:
- I saw a summary of the metadata from the old distribution

What I expected:
- [Say what you expected!]
"""

I'm not sure what is reasonable to expect, and that's the key question. The old summary seems like a reasonable choice, and the fact that it was confusing seems more an artifact of history than a Launchpad bug to me now. That said, perhaps you could argue that the summary should not be shown at all if the package is not available for the current release, the upcoming release, or the current LTS? Mm, My inclination still is to agree with William. That said, if you have a counter-argument, please make it! ...But on the bug, not here :-) .

Thanks

Gary

Revision history for this message
Eliah Kagan (degeneracypressure) said : 		#5

Thanks Gary Poster, that solved my question.