On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 11:22:02AM +0200, Mohammed Adnène Trojette wrote: > On Tue, Aug 09, 2005, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: > > All in all, I've reviewed 153 binary packages [1] and I've submitted 57 bugs > > What is the criteria for the severity you set? According to the thread > on debian-devel[1], Joerg Jaspert suggested[2] normal severity and > a direct bug to ftp.debian.org Cced to the maintainer if the source > package is empty. Santiago Villa suggested[3] wishlist severity. > Everybody was opposed to RC. I missed that thread, it coincided with a mail outage I had back last month. That's why I wasn't aware of the proper wiki pages so thanks for pointing me to it. As for my criteria: - I've reported bugs with a serious severity (i.e. unsuitable for release) if they were associated with dummy packages that had not changed since woody (i.e. were dummy in woody, sarge, etch and sid). Just like I did back in my dummy package hunt before sarge was released. - I've used wishlist for all other dummy packages (i.e. they are used for upgrades from woody) since maintainers can consider this a low-priority issue for the time being. It's a reminder for them, no more. > Actually, it is http://adn.diwi.org/wiki/index.php/DummyPackagesList Noted. > I updated it, and I will review it again with Clément. What still needs > to be done is to double-check the ones with no bug submitted and to > track the bugs submitted on ftp.debian.org in order to keep the list up > to date. Thanks for that, please notice that some are missing: - kerberos4kth-services, kerberos4kth-user and kerberos4kth-x11. Reported against krb4, Bug#322009 - koffice-i18n-zhcngb2312 and koffice-i18n-zhtwbig5.. Reported against koffice-i18n, Bug#322012 - libbonobo-activation4 and libbonobo-activation-dev. See Bug#321828 - libpaperg and libpaperg-dev. Reported vs. libpaper, see #322048 - qvlc. Should probably be associated with #321988 or #322003 or #322013 (All of these might be merged, as they are related to the same _source_ package) - svgalibg1 and svgalibg1-dev. Reported vs. svgalib, see #322068 - tuxracer-data and tuxracer-extras. Associated with #322069 - xlibmesa3, xlibmesa3-dbg and xlibmesa-dev. Reported vs. xfree86, see #322075 - xlibs-pic, xlibs-dev and xlibs-dbg. Reported vs. xorg-x11, see Bug#322076 - xprt and xprt-xprintorg. Reported vs. xprint, see #322078 That leaves only a few more packages (~20) that need to be checked and have bugs filed to complete the table. BTW, #322071 has been closed now. > > > libpgsql-ruby or ipython (amongst others). This the problem of > > not having a standard description for dummy/transitional packages, > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > A debtag ? ;) There is a debtag already and, again, it is not properly used in all the packages either. Regards Javier
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature