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

Tagged ITP (was: Re: (user-)Tagging ITPs)


I just submitted an ITP and tagged it. I discovered that this is still the 
only bug that is tagged this way.


I hope I haven't been to fast.



On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 10:02:12AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Aug 2006, Charles Plessy wrote:
> >In your revised version, you propose:
> >
> > user debian-med@lists.debian.org
> ... which is probably the reasonable part of my proposal.
> > usertag <bug number> + wnpp <cdd> <section inside cdd>
> ... which was mostly based on the example on
> http://wiki.debian.org/DebianScienceSponsoring#head-dd4c76d756afae474c2c9892c9221fd3277b3e80
> >But the <cdd> is already given by the email address. It would make sense
> >to mention it as tag only if all cdds were registering their tags under
> >the same email adress. But in that case we can not have a debian-med
> >specific tracking.
> It might be that I not really fully understand the usertag feature and
> that it needs some tests but my understanding of the taggin is:
>     user debian-med@lists.debian.org
>     usertag <bug number> + debian-med
> is just redundant but does no real harm.  (Please correct me if I'm wrong!)
> So my understanding ist that I could either do
>    http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=debian-med     or
>    http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?users=debian-med@lists.debian.org
> with the same result.  Is this right?
> >Or shall we run a cronjob somewhere which subscribes
> >debian-med@lists.debian.org to each bug tagged debian-med for the user
> >debian-cdd@lists.debian.org?
> This would not make any sense currently because I'm afraid we will be
> the only CDD that makes use of this feature.  Some people (perhaps only Ben)
> in Debian-Junior had some attitude to tag their wnpp bugs but it became
> quite silent in this area.
> >In the end, it depends on the level of interdependancy we want for the
> >different CDDs...
> Well in reality we are in so far independant because not many people
> follow the CDD framework but are busy how to produce their own live
> CDs.  (I have no problem if people discuss building live CD issues
> in the CDD context but IMHO live CDS are a thing to have some fun and
> to show off at exhibitions but are not the basis for real work and thus
> should be only a small part of the CDD efforts.  It more or less shows
> that my idea to bring together people sharing similar ideas on different
> fields not yet succeded.)
> >Apart from this remark, I think that it makes sense to tag ITP/RFP as
> >wnpp + the name of the meta-package which could depend or suggest them.
> You are right here but my idea to leave the "med-" out was leaded by the
> fact that also people from debian-science might search for "bio" or
> "biology" but they would probably not search for "med-bio".  Thus I
> think leaving out the "med-" (which would be redundant if you are
> seeking in the debian-med context (arked by email or tag debian-med)
> would serve more than one purpose and helps other people as well.
> Please do not hesitate to correct me if I'm wrong.  Perhaps
> we should ocntinue this discussion on debian-custom list.
> Kind regards
>         Andreas.
> PS: Apropos tagging: Even more important than tagging the ITPs would be
>     to start working on debtags.
> -- 
> http://fam-tille.de
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact 
> listmaster@lists.debian.org

GPG key:  1024D/3144BE0F Michael Hanke
ICQ: 48230050

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: