On Jo, 16 mai 13, 20:24:41, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > On 16/05/13 at 19:48 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > Hello, > > > > As you might have noticed today I made myself busy doing some bug triage > > from the 'unknown-package' bug list[1] > > > > [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?maint= > > > > I couldn't help noticing there are quite a few new bugs filed against > > wrong/inexistent packages and should probably be dealt with as they are > > filed (reassigned to the correct package or closed as appropriate). > > > > Would it make sense for such bugs to be forwarded to -qa so that more > > people can look at them? > > > > As far as I know they currently go to unknown-package@qa.d.o but I have > > no idea how many persons are behind that alias and I see no reason for > > this to be handled by a private alias. > > Hi Andrei, > > I also see no reason to significantly increase the traffic on -qa@. :) Would you know how many mails that is? > Currently, we have: > unknown-package: cjwatson, aliceinwire@gnumerica.org CCed. > If you are interested in working on that, could you reach out to them > and see if they need help? Yes, I'm interested. Feel free to add me to the alias if there are no objections from your side. > There's also a UDD CGI that lists bugs filed against unknown packages: > http://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugs-removed-packages.cgi This lists quite a lot more bugs than the BTS URL above. I wonder where the difference is coming from... Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature