Re: How to deal with bugs from removed packages?
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Lucas Nussbaum <email@example.com> [2008-01-24 21:08]:
> > I think that the BTS learns the hierarchy of packages' versions by
> > parsing the changelogs. Would your plan work even if the version is a
> > fake one (not in any changelog)?
> At least it's what Don told me to do: "it's probably good enough to
> just mark them fixed in a version which is larger than the version in
> unstable; they'll be marked as from other branch in unstable when the
> packages disapear, and will be archived once they're also absent in
Yeah, marking them fixed in a non-existant version via -done has the
advantage of making the bugs buggy in all suites which have a version
in them, while allowing the bug to be archived once the package no
longer exists in testing and unstable. [And with a suitable convention
for the closure version and subject of messages which close these
bugs, would easily enable you to find these bugs and ressurect them if
someone packaged the removed package again.]
> What I'm not sure is whether appending +rm will always be higher, or
> whether there are some corner cases.
I can't think of a case where it wouldn't be higher, assuming you
always append, even if there is already a +.
There is no such thing as "social gambling." Either you are there to
cut the other bloke's heart out and eat it--or you're a sucker. If you
don't like this choice--don't gamble.
-- Robert Heinlein _Time Enough For Love_ p250