[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

FTP-removal titles more structured



Hi,

As you might have noticed, for those not knowing that I was going to do
it, I've retitled quite some removal requests into a more structured
format, so you can more directly see what it's about. And as a secondary
goal, also with automatic parsing for the benefit of QA scripts in mind.

The format I choose (if you have better idea's or something, just say
so...) is as follows:

Title := TAG PACKAGE SUITEMODIFIER ARCHS " -- " RATIONALE
TAG := "RM: " | "RM/P-a-s: "
PACKAGE := just the package name
SUITEMODIFIER := "" | "/" suite # default being sid/unstable
ARCHS := "" | " [" "!"? one-or-more spece-separated archs "]"
RATIONALE := just the reason for the removal

So, complete removal requests are those without a '[ ... ]' in the
title, those with it, are only-some-archs removal requests, and, for
sarge generally at the moment more urgent than the others.

"RM/P-a-s:" means that the partial removal needs to be added to
Packages-arch-specific too, if the request is honoured. In some cases,
it's a prerequisite, otherwise the arch will show up soon enough again,
in other cases, it'll only save a bit of buildd time. If 'P-a-s' isn't
in the title for arch-specific removals, modification of that document
isn't generally needed.

The suite is indicated by means of tags (sid or woody), but also in the
title for convenience. Requests dealing with multiple suites are split
out, I arrange for the release managers to process those requests that
are for testing.

I've tagged those removal requests that are current (still applicable)
and are at least reasonably reasonable as 'confirmed', with which I
don't imply that I they must indeed be honoured and removed, but just
that the request seems valid and is checked. Whether a removal request
is honoured is of course up to you, I only want to make it easier to do
so, and also make it better possible to prioritize which requests to
deal with (i.e., those with a arch listed should be considered first, I
believe).

Hope this helps,
--Jeroen

-- 
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
Jeroen@wolffelaar.nl (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)
http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl



Reply to: