Re: Orphaned packages in testing which were never in stable
Hi
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:53:00AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 01:08:10AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > I have this sneaking suspicion that we need a tool more appropriate than
> > the BTS to handle the WNPP. The BTS seems rather fragile for this
> > purpose - the format for bug titles and to a greater extent the way
> > followups for bug reports are handled (not going to the bug sumbitter)
> > both seem rather fragile and aren't really handled all that well by the
> > mechanisms normally used when interacting with the BTS.
>
> Yes. Using the BTS for this purpose is ridiculously complicated, far
> from intuitive, and prone to breakage. If only someone were to write
> something better. :)
One solution is to have four separate wnpp packages so you
can reassign them instead of retitle it. It is at least a bit
more intuitive and a bit less error prone.
If should be fairly easy to convert from wnpp to o, ita, rfp and rfa.
Regards,
// Ola
> --
> Mike Stone
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
--
--------------------- Ola Lundqvist ---------------------------
/ opal@debian.org Björnkärrsgatan 5 A.11 \
| opal@lysator.liu.se 584 36 LINKÖPING |
| +46 (0)13-17 69 83 +46 (0)70-332 1551 |
| http://www.opal.dhs.org UIN/icq: 4912500 |
\ gpg/f.p.: 7090 A92B 18FE 7994 0C36 4FE4 18A1 B1CF 0FE5 3DD9 /
---------------------------------------------------------------
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: