On 08:44 Tue 25 May , Jan Hauke Rahm wrote: > On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 01:37:45PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > > Le Mon, May 24, 2010 at 09:27:37PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit : > > > > > > David Moreno Garza used to run a script that retitled old ITA/ITP bugs > > > to O/RFP. Since this was a useful service, I reimplemented it, and have > > > been running it today with fairly conservative settings (18 months of > > > inactivity for both ITP and ITA). (the script is available in > > > collab-qa/retitle-old-ita-itp -- it's not run by cron yet ; see #501257 > > > for an example bug modified by the script) > > > > Hi Lucas, > > > > I just got a couple of your retitling emails and have a couple of suggestions: > > > > - I think that it is better to close ITPs instead or retitling them RFPs, > > otherwise we will perhaps accumulate a large number of inactive RFPs. > > I don't see a problem with that. Quite on the contrary, "loosing" info > gathered during a failed packaging attempt could lead to double (wasted) > work. So, I'd vote for retitling. +1 -- ,''`. Xavier Oswald (xoswald@debian.org) : :' : GNU/LINUX Debian Developer <http://www.debian.org> `. `' GPG Key: 1024D/88BBB51E `- 938D D715 6915 8860 9679 4A0C A430 C6AA 88BB B51E
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature