Re: PTS: RC bugs in dependencies
On Fri, 10 May 2013, Bart Martens wrote:
> > I would also suggest not displaying bugs where someone is actively taking
> > care of it (i.e. when a owner is set even though it's not often used).
>
> Creative idea, but I'm afraid that setting the owner is not a sufficiently
> common practice to base this on.
Yes, but it would provide a way to not display some bugs that take long to fix
(think license issues). So even if uncommon, it can be useful.
> > I would also suggest to completely ignore RC bugs in package with
> > lots of reverse dependencies, that is until they are tagged help
> > or are getting really old.
>
> I'm not sure about this. Somehow I think that RC bugs in packages with many
> reverse dependencies are more important than other.
They are but they are also more likely to have an active maintainer. On
the other hand, packages with few reverse dependencies are more likely
to have an MIA maintainer without anyone noticing.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer
Get the Debian Administrator's Handbook:
→ http://debian-handbook.info/get/
Reply to: