Your message dated Fri, 30 Nov 2007 18:44:47 -0600 with message-id <87fxyn5jls.fsf@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com> and subject line New "upstream-bts" field in debian/control has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message ---
- To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
- Subject: debian-policy: [PROPOSAL] New "upstream-bts" field in debian/control
- From: Francois Marier <francois@debian.org>
- Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 10:53:27 +1300
- Message-id: <20071105215327.4999.60877.reportbug@isafjordur.dyndns.org>
Package: debian-policy Version: 3.7.2.2 Severity: wishlist I'd like to propose a new field for the control file: the location of the upstream bug tracker for the package. I see two main advantages: - allows users to easily find upstream bugs and file new ones directly if they want - would enable the PTS to nicely integrate the upstream trackers I'm not sure what to call this field though. Maybe "External-Bug-Tracker"? Francois
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
- To: 449463-done@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: New "upstream-bts" field in debian/control
- From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>
- Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 18:44:47 -0600
- Message-id: <87fxyn5jls.fsf@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
Hi, It is way too early for this to be a policy proposal. If you look at the VCS-* fields; they went through a series of changes, and there was code provided that made something actually use/display the field (PTS). When this proposal has gone through the same level fo design/implementation, and mentioned in the dev-ref; _then_ we'll document it in policy. The technical policy is not a design document. On the other hand, perhaps it is time, as Russ said, to move VCS-* fields into the policy proper, since they seem to have matured. manoj -- "The algorithm to do that is extremely nasty. You might want to mug someone with it." -- M. Devine, Computer Science 340 Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/> 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--- End Message ---