Re: Bugs, usertags, and including more people
> > Well, I thought of this, yes. But there are times when a program uses
> > more than one language. For example, Oregano (an electronics program
> > that I help maintain) is coded in C, uses a lot of GTK, but also has
> > some perl scripts... So, if a bug occured in a perl script, it would
> > show up as a C+GTK bug, which it is not...
> Nice example of a corner case but what are these perl scripts doing ?
Does it matter? The program uses them to convert from one simulator
format to the other, or something like that.
> It's mainly a gtk+ program - as it's already tagged, but lacks made-of::lang:c atm.
Well, yes, it's in my TODO list to correctly tag all of my packages.
> If you think about it more deeper, what if a random package contain a
> buggy postinst, prerm, ... but the software itself is written in
> language x ? The tag won't be useful to prepare a report containing
> "language x bugs", but "bugs into packages made of language x" imo.
Yes, indeed. That's why I don't want to rely _only_ on debtags.
There could be a lang-pkg-debian, or similar, because that's the skill
needed, even if the script is written in bash, you need to know more
than how to use the shell to do a correct postinst script.
Or maybe, we could make the language tag be bash, and have another
subgroup of tags named "skill" which might include things like ui,
pkg-debian, complex maths, etc... It might be nice to have that too,
although it might also be more difficult to assess which skills are