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

Re: Use of pseudo-tags to mark translation issues

On Fri, 2003-09-19 at 02:39, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Philippe Faes wrote:
> > 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
> > they?
> Because the number of tags would get unwieldy.  And the bts doesn't have
> priorities, it has severities, which are different.  And even if it did have
> priorities, they wouldn't be enough to classify a bug.

I believe my argument still stands. 
Our options are: a zillion standardised pseudo-tags (which people would
have to look up when they use them) plus a few real tags which are
supported by 'reportbug'
OR: a zillion + a few  real tags, all supported by the BTS and by
I am not convinced that the first option is better. In fact it looks
more like a hack than a permanent solution. I still think we should
consider moving the pseudo-tags to the BTS tag system.


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

Reply to: