On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 01:06:20PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > Hm, yeah. So the brave new world will be that bugs won't be listed as > fully closed in unstable until all architectures are in sync? Point. Having a 'arch=source' option might be a better default then? If it's possible, I'd like an 'arch=*' or 'arch=all' option, though. > I think, then, we let the 'found' bugginess state win, then 'fixed', > then 'absent', so when listing bugs across architectures the buggiest > one wins. I've got untested code for that now. I've no idea what you mean here. > > Maybe the "doesn't apply to this version" bugs could be listed iff some > > other option is set (say "showotherverbugs=yes")? > Eventually yes, although it's convenient for debugging at the moment. > Actually, maybe have it default to yes but allow "showotherverbugs=no"? > I rather like having them there to make sure bugs don't get lost, TBH. Yeah, make the default "yes" now, consider changing it later maybe. I think we'll definitely need to change it when we start mixing in archived bugs -- listing all the bugs still open in stable would get ugly fast, IMO. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <email@example.com> <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?''
Description: PGP signature