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

Re: Review request for apt-listbugs template po file



Francesco Poli wrote:
> [...]
> 
> Wow, that's a major rewrite of part of the man page!
> Do you release it under the same license terms as apt-listbugs (GPLv2
> or later [1])?

Sure, this and any other material I contribute.  Maybe I ought to have
some sort of default licensing statement in my mailheaders, if only I
could think of something clear and concise enough.

> I will think about it and I will probably fix it, sooner or later (but
> I don't know whether such a change is acceptable during a freeze... so
> maybe later).

A man page rewrite is enough to be getting on with; any changes in
behaviour (and don't forget the naming of the --stats option!) can
wait.

Which is the "fixed" state checking for, though - a tag or some other
feature?  http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer doesn't say anything
about the "fixed" tag being obsolete - it just says that it replaces
"the old _fixed_ severity".  And then again there's the server-control
command "fixed <bugnumber> <version>"...

Tentatively:

	pending = default state
	forwarded = marked as forwarded
	pending-fixed = tagged as "pending"
(?)	fixed = tagged as "fixed"
(?)	absent = not found in this distribution/architecture
	done = resolved in this distribution/architecture

-- 
JBR	with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
	sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package


Reply to: