Re: Debian WWW CVS commit by bertol: webwml/english/Bugs server-control.wml
On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 03:06:17PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-06-24 at 11:59 +0200, Nicolas Bertolissio wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 11:21:56AM -0600, Debian WWW CVS wrote:
> > > > Log message:
> > > > Archives a bug that was previously unarchived
> > >
> > > I'm sure this change is right. Nevertheless Don denied this change the
> > > last time I asked for it
> > > (http://lists.debian.org/debian-www/2007/06/msg00091.html).
> >
> > Sorry, I'm going to revert this change so, but I don't understand the
> > meaning of this sentense. Please Don, could you explain in other words
> > what this command does so I can translate this correctly into French.
>
> It's now possible to unarchive a bug using the new "unarchive" command.
> One can also re-archive such a bug using "archive" which will
> immediately return the bug's state to "archived", assuming it still
> meets the criteria usually applied for archiving (with the exception
> that any time-based criteria are ignored).
>
> One cannot, however, use "archive" to archive a bug that has not
> previously been archived. The first archiving of a bug will occur when
> it meets the BTS' criteria for doing so, and cannot be forced to occur
> at an earlier time.
>
> The wording of Nicolas's change does not differentiate between the case
> of a bug that has been unarchived using "unarchive" and a bug that has
> never been archived before. I assume that's what Don is objecting to -
> "archive" can only be used to /re/-archive a previously archived bug.
Nicolas and my proposed change is not wrong as only previously archived
bugs can be unarchived. That's why it's not wrong to write: "Archives a
bug that was previously unarchived".
Archiving an already archived bug (without a prior unarchive) is just a
no-op, it's not wrong but makes just no sense.
I assume the current sentence "Archives a bug that was previously archived"
confuses many readers ...
Jens
Reply to: