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

Re: Tracking RFSs as bugs


I do not sponsor very much, but I am a bit unhappy about having comment
possibilities on both mentors.d.n and the mailing list with information
not forwarded.  This results in duplicate work (for example I reviewed a
package that already had a review on mentors.d.n pointing out the same

Which system we end up using, I do not really care about, but I would
prefer if it was accessible by mail (for both reading and writing

For a BTS-based workflow as proposed I had these ideas (based on [1],
but without using usertags to keep things a bit simpler):

 - A new pseudo-package mentors.debian.org (or whatever) is created; the
   maintainer is set to debian-mentors@l.d.o so all bug mail is sent to
 - New requests should use "RFS: <package>/<version>"; maybe with
   "[NEW]" appended for packages not yet in the archive.
   It might be helpful to have mentors.d.n be able to file them (on
   manual request).

 - Comments are sent to the BTS. Tags are used as follows:
   - moreinfo: Open questions or changes are required before an upload.
   - confirmed: Somebody did review the package and thinks it is okay.
     (Not needed when the package is directly uploaded.)
   - pending (closing the bug): Somebody will (did) upload the package
     (no further changes required).

 - mentors.d.n automatically closes RFS bugs for uploaded packages or
   packages that were removed from there.  It may also automatically
   close inactive bugs.

 - Packages tagged both moreinfo and confirmed get the confirmed tag
   removed automatically.

It would still be possible to provide a web interface for comments on
mentors.d.n: it would just create a mail to the BTS and also set the
appropriate tags.


[1] <http://wiki.debian.org/PackageReview>

Reply to: