Re^2: Intent to write: ITP
cjwatson@flatline.org.uk (Colin Watson) wrote:
> "Pawel Wiecek" <coven-debian-devel@debian.org> wrote:
> >After sending a bunch of ITPs I found out that it's not very convenient. I'd
> >like to create a dedicated script (similar to bug or reportbug) to send ITPs
> >(and RFPs, ITOs, RFAs...). Are there any objections?
>
> reportbug 1.12 introduced special support for the wnpp pseudo-package
> along these lines. Try it, you might like it.
While reportbug is useful, it has the disadvantage that the command
'reportbug wnpp' forces one to wait a fairly long time (while it downloads
the current list of ITP, etc. packages) before one can start writing an ITP.
It might be reasonable to revise reportbug to optimize it for wnpp.
Whether reportbug is revised or Pawel writes a new itp program,
it would be extremely useful if a strict format were required for
ITP's, along the lines of the control files, e.g.:
Package: foo
CurrentVersion: 6.5
Maintainer: jblow <J.Blow@debian.org>
Copyright: GNU
WebSite: http://foo.source.forge
Description: all-in-one spam filter, number cruncher, and editor.
This package has it all. Blah. Blah. Blah.
Blah. Blah. Blah.
The advantage of adopting a specific format is that the many ITP's
could easily be searched using a powerful tool like grep-dctrl.
This would save a lot of time.
Reactions?
Susan Kleinmann
Reply to: