Re: the BTS gains a remote bug tracking feature for free !
* Pierre Habouzit <pierre.habouzit@m4x.org> [2006-05-03 15:49]:
> IMHO, in his case, he should remove the forward, tag the bug
> upstream, and mention in the bug history that this is related to the
> upstream bug "foo". set the forwarded state of a bug does not makes
> sense to me, if you dont adhere to how upstream deals it.
The problem I have with this approach is that suddenly you or your
program is dictating how a maintainer has to do their job. In my
specific case, it's not a big issue but it is a general problem of
this script. I hope you'll be able to implement incremental changes,
i.e. to only change something when the upstream but tracker changes
(like aba suggested).
Also, I don't know how you're planning to change bugs in the future
but I'd like to see one control message per package or maybe even per
bug, and it should be CCed to the bug report (or maintainer) so they
know what's going on.
Thanks for working on this.
> Which would mean that btslink would have to keep a local database of
> the upstreams statuses, which I wanted to avoid, because it's
> fragile IMHO, and moreover it's hard when you deal with a given
> forwarded bug to know what to do.
Maybe you can try and see how fragile it really is.
--
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/
Reply to: