Re: BTS improvements (was: Re: 88 Priority violations in woody
On Wed, May 01, 2002 at 12:55:07AM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > We really should have the RC list generated by bugscan, with a
> > overrides file (we already have this) controlled by the RM -- and
> > that list should then be the official list for RC bugs.
> That was the procedure for slink and potato. Anthony has write access to
> the bugscan overrides file but he is not using it.
Actually, I did try writing to the bugscan comments file the other day
like I used to in potato, but about 24 hours later it got cleared back
to just a handful of exclusions.
Most of the comments end up being "Doesn't affect woody" (since the
bugs apply to later versions of the package than is in woody), and most
of the new bugs that appear would need that comment added, so it's not
really helpful for me.
> * keep track of package versions and which distribution they are in
> so we can check if a bug is fixed in a specific distribution
> * integrate bugscan(-like) functionality into a report feature
Amen. (And graphs!)
Anthony Towns <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``BAM! Science triumphs again!''
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org