Re: A thought on urgency
>>"Jason" == Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca> writes:
Jason> On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> Another possibility (presuming you have a small number of possible urgencies),
>> is to have a header more like:
>>
>> Most-Recent-Urgency:
>> high 1.2-3
>> medium 1.2-4
>> low 1.2-6
Jason> Off hand this seems quite reasonable. You do loose the ability
Jason> to detect multiple high urgency uploads, and the granularity
Jason> is limited to 3 types, but that might not be so important.
Actually, we can increase the granularity by adding urgencies
like security and critical, with obvious meanings. And I think that 5
sets of named urgencies would cover the most common usage case.
Jason> Mark's problem *could* be addressed by making the urgencies
Jason> sets.. First match = priority. By Mark's example you'd list
Jason> low (< 1.2), high (< 1.4)
Jason> I'd suggest the field look like:
Jason> Urgency: high (< 1.2-3), medium (< 1.2-4), low (< 1.2-6)
Umm. Where is this foeld being added to now? I kinda got lost
in all the proposals. Am I right in understanding that the
Most-Recent-Urgency: field is calculated by grubbing through the
changelog? So somewhere in the package creation process one can add
in an invocation to a script that generates this field and adds it to
the control file?
manoj
--
"It is the creationists who blasphemously are claiming that God is
cheating us in a stupid way." Nienhuys
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: