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

Re: feedback on review-update-needed --lts --unclaim (Re: november report)



On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 10:54:47AM -0500, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
> Ah okay, so the lack of locales package could explain the problem then?

I suppose so.

> > If the unsorted order is the same as the one in data/dla-needed.txt I'd want that.
> Okay, so do we change the default or add a "--sort-by unsorted"
> argument? I'd favor the former.
 
me too.

> > looks good, thanks! maybe: s#Editing#Edited# ?
> I try to make status messages reflect the actual state, so in this case
> because the message comes *before* the actual file edition, it says
> "editing". If it would say "edited", it should come *after* the file is
> closed, but in that case if there's a problem editing the file you get
> no debugging information on the console as to why the problem occurs.
> That's why I usually describe the action that is "happening"
> (e.g. "Editing") instead of "happened" ("edited").
 
ok, makes sense, thanks.

> I just need to know how you want to remove people/packages from the
> checks then.

I guess I'll start with a very short local shell script, which calls the
script with all the usual params and excludes src:linux. 

Once we want/need to exclude people we can see what we can do better.


-- 
cheers,
	Holger

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
       PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: