Re: Possible DDPOMail improvements?
On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 3:46 AM, Lucas Nussbaum
<lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net> wrote:
> It could also report (i.e the code is there, but it's disabled
> currently) on:
> 7. RC bugs in stable
> 8. Unfixed security issues (according to the security team tracker)
Yummy, yes please!
I'd suggest including oldstable RC bugs and security issues too.
The security tracker lists issues fixed in stable-security but not
stable (ie, no point release yet) as still open, please ensure that
DDPOMail handles this appropriately. I think we can assume that most
if not all stable users also use stable-security.
> We (Raphael Geissert, who did most of the work on that service recently,
> and me) believe those mails are useful, since we did not get too many
> unsubscribe requests, and also got some "thank you" from people who use
> it as a TODO list.
Thank you very much for that work.
> But we are constantly wondering where we should go from there. Should we
> add more data (like the RC bugs in stable and the unfixed security
> issues)? Or should we instead try to decrease the amount of data (to
> increase the signal/noise ratio), for example by not reporting about
> Lintian errors and warnings?
I'd lean towards more info. I imagine others would prefer less. So
perhaps a subscription setting would be useful.
I'd like to echo buxy's suggestion about a web-based version, which
would satisfy #461898.
PET from the pkg-perl folks comes close, but isn't available for every
maintainer/uploader (only specific teams who installed it) and doesn't
cover everything in DDPOMail.
http://pkg-perl.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/pet.cgi
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Reply to: