Re: WNPP bug overview
Hi Bas,
>> Bas Zoetekouw <bas@debian.org> writes:
> WNPP bug overview for Nov 19, 2001
> ===================================
>
> There are 809 WNPP bugs in the BTS, of which
> - 52 are RFA's (packages in need of adoption) [2 contrib, 3 non-free]
"offered up for adoption"?
> - 88 are O's (orphaned packages) [6 contrib, 6 non-free]
> - 83 are ITA's (packages being adopted) [3 contrib, 14 non-free]
> - 103 are RFP's (requested packages)
> - 479 are ITP's (packages being worked on)
> - 4 are errors (see below)
> - distributed-net-pproxy, 216 days orphaned, 0 RC bugs [non-free]
> Description: Personal proxy for distributed.net clients
I really miss the reverse depends info here. It's useful in some
cases, e.g.:
blas (#115397), orphaned 41 days ago
Description: common lin. alg. routines
Reverse Depends: lapack-dev petscgraphics1 atlas-test
petscgraphics1-demo blitz++ lapack r-base-dev blas-dev
("lin. alg."? argh!)
That means that if blas ever enters the "this is going to be removed"
state, atlas, petscgraphics, lapack, blitz++ and r would be affected.
Some reverse depends are superfluos (blas-dev in this case for example)
because they belong to the same source package.
Since you are generating a nice summary of changes during the last
week, it'd be worthwhile to include source package names for at least
RFA's and O's in it.
4 new packages up for adoption (RFA): dpkg glibc sysvinit xfree86
> The following ITA's will be renamed to O's or RFA's[2]:
> - 68134 ITA --> RFA: auto-pgp (1085 days old)
this information is useful, but I don't think it belongs in a mail to
debian-devel-announce. Informing the person who submitted the bug
about it is a good idea. Informing debian-devel or debian-qa is also a
good idea.
> The following duplicate bugs will be merged:
> - new-pinepgp: 88327(RFP) 110743(ITP)
please inform the submitters, too.
> The following errors were encountered:
> - 111032: orphaned package "yodl" does not exist in archive
this is useful information for debian-qa
> [1] Orphaned packages are to be removed after:
> - 300 days (main, no RC bugs)
> - 50 days (contrib, no RC bugs)
> - 25 days (non-free, no RC bugs)
> - 150 days (main, one or more RC bugs)
> - 25 days (contrib, one or more RC bugs)
> - 10 days (non-free, one or more RC bugs)
> [2] ITA's will be renamed to O's or RFA's after 50 days
> [2] ITP's will be renamed to RFP's after 50 days
Please take into account package's Priority.
Other than that, since this is obviously doing a much better job than
my version, would you like to take charge of the weekly report
generation?
--
Marcelo | Too many people want to *have written*.
mmagallo@debian.org | -- (Terry Pratchett, alt.fan.pratchett)
Reply to: