not a bug: mavros/b6b9754?

[gavanderhoorn]

The description of b6b9754 reads as-if the change in mavlink/mavros@b6b9754 fixes a bug identified by a developer.

That commit seems to be part of a "regular" pull request ("inital draft for set_actuator_control plugin", see the list of commits) and seems to just be a fix of a mistake introduced earlier in the same PR (ie: the proposed changes never made it into the repository in their buggy state).

I'm wondering whether this should be marked as a bug. There is no user report, nor a report by a developer. The unfixed code never was part of the repository and was fixed in the same PR.

It doesn't look like we consistently mark such cases as bugs in other repositories (ie: developer fixing his/her own mistake in a subsequent commit of a PR).

[wasowski]

My perspective (for the record): the paper is about real bugs in robotics software, not about the quality of releases, or mainline of ROS development. In this sense, b6b9754 is still a valid defect (it has been made, and repaired, just never made it into master).