Tracking suites not affected by a bug (Re: Doing some stable QA work)
Le August 15, 2008 10:29:45 am Don Armstrong, vous avez écrit :
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2008, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 08:08:10PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 11:01:46PM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> > > > Tagging lenny and sid does not imply that other suites are free
> > > > from the bug,
> > >
> > > Yes, it does.
>
> It only implies that for britney; the BTS itself ignores it save for
> archiving.
[...]
> *** end proposal ***
>
> Does that meet the needs of the RMs et al? Are there any objections?
This is interesting, but what would happen with the current suite tags?
If the plan is really to change again the meaning of the plain suite tags, I
slightly object, since they already had two meanings. We still see people
misusing suite tags by their old meaning. An alternative would be to create
new suite tags with a prefix or suffix, say "etch-only". I would approve the
proposal with such a modification if someone volunteers to "copy the stable
tag" when creating a new testing tag (as discussed in my previous mail). An
even better alternative would be to use new bug properties instead of tags,
something like "Impact-starts: etch", "Impact-ends: foo". Then, for example,
if a bug does not affect etch, $ bts ###### impact-starts lenny
Reply to: