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

Re: Use of pseudo-tags to mark translation issues

I can see that is is useful for us to cathegorise bugs, and to be able
to find i18n bugs automatically. However, the BTS already has a system
of tags AND priorities.
Why aren't the existing tags system expanded to include the pseudo-tags
that Adam suggests? (eg. doc,arch,intl,assert,...) I don't see a good
reason to have tags AND pseudo-tags. They serve the same purpose don't
I intend to use the convention Martin suggests, but I hope it will be
abandoned soon in favor of regular tags.


On Thu, 2003-09-18 at 15:20, Martin Quinson wrote:
> Hello, Adam Heath is conducting an experiment to sort out the bunch of bugs
> reported against the dpkg package. As explained in 
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-dpkg/2003/debian-dpkg-200309/msg00092.html
> , it is now recommended to mark the bugs concerning translations and bugs of
> translations by [INTL] in their title while reporting against dpkg. You can
> also specify the language in it. For example, a new french translation would
> be marked [INTL:fr]. The advantage of it is that the web pages allow to sort
> things up, and you can ask to see french issues by loading the page:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=dpkg&include=subj:[INTL:fr]
> What do you guys think?
> Thanks, Mt.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: