Re: freeze policy - open requests for sponsorship
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
user sponsorship-requests@packages.debian.org
usercategory wheezy-status
* Wheezy Status [tag=]
+ Intended for Wheezy [for-wheezy]
+ Not Intended for Wheezy [not-for-wheezy]
+ Fit for Wheezy [fit-for-wheezy]
+ Not Fit for Wheezy [not-fit-for-wheezy]
+ Uncategorized []
usercategory wheezy-view
* status
* wheezy-status
* severity
thanks
Hi,
I have start usertagging some bugs "not-fit-for-wheezy" (see below).
With this mail (CC: control), I am trying to set-up a BTS view that
you should be able to access with:
http://http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=sponsorship-requests;ordering=wheezy-view
I am not (yet) setting it as the default, please comment if you find
it useful/ugly/whatever...
Regards, Thibaut.
Le 18/07/12 14:31, Thibaut Paumard a écrit :
> Le 16/07/12 11:05, Thibaut Paumard a écrit :
>> Le 03/07/12 08:20, Thibaut Paumard a écrit :
>>> Le 03/07/12 01:41, Adam Borowski a écrit : Hi,
>
>>> We could agree on a usertag then, for instance:
>
>>> User: sponsorship-requests@packages.debian.org Usertags:
>>> not-for-wheezy
>
>>> Using sponsorship-requests@packages.debian.org as the User, we
>>> should be able to rearrange the default view of
>>> bugs.debian.org/sponsorship-requests to have the "for-wheezy"
>>> bugs on top (subclassified by severity) followed by the
>>> not-for-wheezy bugs.
>
>>> cf. http://wiki.debian.org/bugs.debian.org/usertags
>
>> Hi,
>
>> (For the record, IANADD... yet)
>
>> I was about to triage some bugs with these two usertags
>> (for-wheezy and not-for-wheezy), but I realized it is impossible
>> to do without the assent from the submitter. Actually, I have
>> read the first 10 RFSes or so, and if I could, I would not upload
>> any of them because they are not fit for wheezy and they don't
>> state whether they are aiming for wheezy.
>
> Hi again,
>
> I propose two _additional_ tags that could be set independently
> from the maintainer: fit-for-wheezy and not-fit-for wheezy. Those
> two would be used to show that the package has been reviewed and
> is/is not fit for wheezy. For instance if I review a package and it
> does too much modifications, I tag it "not-fit-for-wheezy". The
> maintainer has then two basic options: - revert the useless
> changes, remove the "not-fit-for-wheezy" tag and add the
> "for-wheezy" tag; - tag the package "not-for-wheezy" and/or set
> distribution to experimental.
>
> Unless there are objections, I will start setting the
> (not-)fit-for-wheezy usertags tomorrow.
>
> Reminder: this is to help our sponsors, I can't sponsor myself. If
> you don't like the idea, please say so.
>
> Kind regards, Thibaut.
>
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=+PMM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: