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 <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:
pgpY0NEXHhkJs.pgp
Description: PGP signature