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

Re: tags - information v requests for help

On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 11:50:28AM +0100, Mark Howard wrote:
> - Supplying information about a bug (sid, woody, patch, security,
> upstream, d-i, confirmed, pending...)
> - Asking for help with a particular topic (help, unreproducible,
> moreinfo, ipv6, lfs..)

Uh, or not. These tags describe the state of the bug too: that the
maintainer isn't able to fix it, reproduce it, understand it; or that
it's an ipv6, or lfs specific issue, respectively. The aim of those first
three tags in particular is to help the maintainer categorise the bugs.

> Secondly, many people have been requesting (in various email threads in
> response to introduction of ipv6 & lfs) the introduction of new tags.
> These have all been of the request for help variety. The current system
> is rather inflexible in this respect.

The reason they're being asked for is mostly so third parties can
generate lists of bugs in their field of interest, and work through them
to fix them.  The IPv6 people, eg, would like a list of all the issues
affecting Debian's IPv6 compatibility so they can send in patches,
and make sure their patches are being applied.

There's really no reason for this to be done within the BTS itself. Creating
a list of:

	$ cat ipv6-related-bugs

is enough to manage that adequately, and all that's needed is some sort
of CGI index of the listed bugs with links to the BTS proper.

The dividing line (IMO) is that the stuff within the BTS should be needed
by the maintainers (and the RM ;) -- stuff that's not really particularly
useful for the maintainer is better maintained outside of the BTS itself
by whoever's particularly interested in it.

One way of doing this, which might be too evil, is to have a BTS CGI
that accepts, by POST, a list of all the bugs affecting, say, SELinux
compatability. That'd let the list be kept externally (a good thing), but
also keep the scripts internal to the BTS (probably also a good thing).

> Does anybody else think this is a good idea?

I think we agree on the problem.

> [please CC me - I'm not on the list]


a (Argggh) j

Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

       ``Is this some kind of psych test?
                      Am I getting paid for this?''

Attachment: pgpakcBw6AZoj.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: