On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 12:48:20PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Why is it bad ? It does fullfull our needs ... you recognize it > yourself. That's enough to start using it. It's not bad, is an hack. Fullfill our need but isn't the right place. Anyway, yes, it's enough to start using it, but ... > It doesn't really pollute the BTS since all bugs only appears in the > "sponsorship" package. Concerning RC bug list, well we'd have no release This has also a drawback: reconstructing history of threads between applicant and sponser will sooner become a pain. Is currently a pain also to crawl in bug report pages for package with an huge number of reported bug. Maybe you can provide some access statistics for the original CGI sponsorhip pages ... How many bugs (and related thread) you think such a page can have? > > Anyway we have the BTS sources and engine up and running is pretty easy > > to set up another one with almost no pain [1] that we can use only for > > sponsorship. Just put it somewhere like sponsor.debian.org. > > This just means that you never installed a BTS yourself ... :-) Surely, this is probably my major fault in this discussion ... I was supposing that start up a new BTS is an easy task, if this is not the case, never mind. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli - undergraduate student of CS @ Univ. Bologna, Italy zack@cs.unibo.it | ICQ# 33538863 | http://www.cs.unibo.it/~zacchiro "I know you believe you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant!" -- G.Romney
Attachment:
pgp42GzDF_yRj.pgp
Description: PGP signature