[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: suite tags (Re: Doing some stable QA work)

On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 11:35:39PM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> Le August 14, 2008 11:08:10 pm Steve Langasek, vous avez écrit :
> > 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.
> Why would it?

Because it always has.

> > > so this unfortunately wouldn't help the graph. Moreover, "suite x"
> > > doesn't mean anymore that the bug is found in suite x, but "This bug
> > > should not be archived until it is fixed in suite x."

> > Not unless there's been a regression since the last time I talked to Don
> > about this.
> For current suites, the meaning was changed (see 
> http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#tags ). Assuming that the tags whose 
> meaning changed were cleared when the change happened, this isn't a 
> regression, except that people who missed the announcement may of course use 
> the tag in error.

No, I spoke with Don after that documentation was changed and explained why
it was necessary to retain tags with the original meanings separate from the
"suite-ignore" tags.  He agreed in principle, and TTBOMK those tags have
been honored accordingly ever since.

The documentation was never corrected in this regard, but all the graphing
and reports generated by either the bugmasters or the release team reflected
this usage.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Reply to: