Re: cpu usage, consideration of others, apt-listbugs
Masato Taruishi <taru@debian.org> writes:
> Adam Heath wrote:
>
> > > On IRC, I was suggested that apt-listbugs should use index.db. I had to
> > > use debbugs .status file too because index.db doesn't have subject.
> > >
> > > apt-listbugs fetches just few static files from web server, two index
> > > files and .status files of actual critical bugs. So if 5 critical
> > > bugs are found, total 7 static files are downloaded. apt-listbugs
> > > can be used via normal proxy servers.
> >
> > Requesting those files isn't itself causing load. I just don't like that the
> > debbugs database is exported that way.
>
> I agree. debbugs database is an internal format and not interface to
> other programs. Actually, I wanted a released interface to access bts
> other than cgi because it's slow and can't be cached easily. But
> there was no fast interface to fetch bug reports. There is e-mail
> interface, but it's little complex to manage database. I prefer LDAP
> interface rather than e-mail interface. I'm sorry, but I'm not on
> debbugs-ml. Is there any plan to implement LDAP interface? (There is
> LDAP interface, but it searches debbugs dynmically and therefore slow
> and no-indexing).
Afaik its already there:
See wnpp-mail for an example:
http://cvs.infodrom.org/tools/master/wnpp-mail?rev=1.8&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup&cvsroot=infodrom&only_with_tag=HEAD
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: