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

Bug#28026: marked as done (dealing differently with bugs based on the architecture)

Your message dated Sun, 25 Feb 2007 18:01:09 -0800
with message-id <20070226020109.GN31846@volo.donarmstrong.com>
and subject line BTS versioning, usertags, and the various porter tags handle this appropriately
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: bugs.debian.org

Debian is porting to multiple architectures, but the bug system does
not know about these ports.  For example, there was recently a
non-maintainer upload of lpr for the alpha, so the i386 had lpr_5.9-31
while the alpha had lpr_5.9-31.1.  There was a bug in lpr_5.9-31.1
which completely disabled its functionality, and would be classified
"important" in severity.

In my dream world, I would have submitted a bug report with severity:
important, architecture: alpha.  Then the bug processing system would
have noticed that the version I was filing against was an
off-architecture non-maintainer upload, and would therefore have sent
the bug report to that person, who would screen it, so it would only
go on to the actual package maintainer if whoever did the
non-maintainer upload didn't handle it themselves.  Also in lists of
important bugs and such, the architecture information would be used.
And some packages would be annotated to send alpha-specific bugs to a
specific person on the alpha port team, rather than to the usual
maintainer of that package.

Right now there is actually a separate micro-bugs-database for just
the alpha, see http://beezer.med.miami.edu:8080/alpha/ for a pointer
to it.  That is silly - it would be much better for debian as a whole
if the port efforts could use the big bugs database, in all its glory,
and could view architecture-specific bugs when appropriate.


Well, the above was just my thoughts of how the bug track database
might handle architecture information.  Maybe some other way would be
better - but there should be some way.

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
The fact that we now have versioning and can tell which version
corresponds to which architecture appears (at least on the surface) to
deal with this bug appropriate.

As we can also set owner, the tags, and usertags even if versioning is
not sufficient, these additional features should prove so.


Don Armstrong

-- 
If you have the slightest bit of intellectual integrity you cannot
support the government. -- anonymous

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu

--- End Message ---
Reply to: