Re: divergence from upstream as a bug
On Sat, 17 May 2008, Joey Hess wrote:
> The bug can be tracked, with a patch, in our BTS. The bug can be
> forwarded upstream as the patch is sent upstream. A tag "divergence"
> can be used to query for all such bugs, or to sort such bugs out of
> the way.
It actually might even be useful to expose the upstream maintainers of
specific packages to the bts so that upstream maintainers of multiple
different packages can easily locate the upstream bugs which apply to
their packages. [I don't know how best to do this currently, but
something like mole or similar with an easily appendable list of
maintainers would be awesome.]
> Other tags and BTS data can be used if desired. For example,
> "divergence fixed-upstream", "divergence wontfix", "divergence
> help". Versioning information can be used to track when an upstream
> version resolves the divergence. Discussion and updated patches can
> be CCed to the bug log.
I wouldn't be averse to adding this divergence tag; I'd be even more
convinced if a few people would try this out using usertags just as a
proof of concept before I do so. Please e-mail owner@ and/or file a
wishlist bug against bugs.debian.org with that request so I don't
forget.
> The BTS could be enhanced to allow opening a bug and forwarding it
> upstream in a single message. (IIRC currently, it takes two). This
> would allow a very simple workflow where a DD makes a change to a
> package, generates a patch, and sends it upstream while also
> recording the divergence in the BTS.
This is a needed feature that I'm working on; it'll come along with
being able to set almost any of the control@ features at submit@ time.
Don Armstrong
--
[A] theory is falsifiable [(and therefore scientific) only] if the
class of its potential falsifiers is not empty.
-- Sir Karl Popper _The Logic of Scientific Discovery_ §21
http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Reply to: