[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: divergence from upstream as a bug

On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 03:55:12PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> One of the wishlist features for the BTS that I've been contemplating
> setting up is a "summary" feature, whre the current summary of a bug
> is shown at the top, with the history continuing below.
> This could be easily extended to having patch messages nominate
> themselves as the summary message.

How I'm reading the latter paragraph is that patch messages are
*alternative* as some non-patch summary message, am I wrong? I think the
two should be orthogonal: you can have or not a summary message, you can
have or not a patch.

But still this does not solve another problem we have with patch
management in the BTS: they are sometimes inlined, while sometimes the
are attached. Can't we fix attachment as the required format for
patches? (e.g. forcing an attachment if one wants to add +patch or
something similar). This + the forthcoming ability above to identify
*the* latest patch will give us the ability to automatically extract
patches from bug reports.


Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what?
zack@{upsilon.cc,cs.unibo.it,debian.org}  -<%>-  http://upsilon.cc/zack/
(15:56:48)  Zack: e la demo dema ?    /\    All one has to do is hit the
(15:57:15)  Bac: no, la demo scema    \/    right keys at the right time

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: