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

Bug#211297: marked as done ([britney] britney should judge sense of putting a package into testing)



Your message dated Sat, 14 May 2011 01:28:27 +0200
with message-id <20110513232827.GA32028@radis.liafa.jussieu.fr>
and subject line Re: Bug#211297: ftp.debian.org: britney should judge sense of putting a package into testing
has caused the Debian Bug report #211297,
regarding [britney] britney should judge sense of putting a package into testing
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
211297: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=211297
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: ftp.debian.org
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-09-16
Severity: minor

Hi aj,

$ madison --regex myspell
[...]
myspell-lt | 0.5.20030624-1 |       testing | all
myspell-lt | 0.5.20030624-1 |      unstable | all
myspell-lv |    0.5.5-1 |       testing | source, all
myspell-lv |    0.5.5-1 |      unstable | source, all

Hmm. This does not make much sense.

I understand that - from the view of the testing scripts - myspell-*
(repspectively their source packages) are valid candidates and
therefore are let into testing.

And they are even installable; do not make sense though. They are the
dictionaries for OpenOffice.org and the mozilla spellchecker (so used
by OpenOffice.org and mozilla-snapshot currently). mozilla-snapshot
isn't in testing and OpenOffice.org is in testing with 1.0.3-2 against
which those myspell packages declare a conflict.

So there we have myspell-* packages now in testing which makes no
sense until openoffice.org (>> 1.0.3-2) dripples into testing on which
is worked on...

But when that shouldn't happen we have senseless packages in testing,
ok they can be removed if the time comes but still the testing scripts
may be able to modified to not let such situations occur.

I honestly do not have an idea currently how this might be implemented
since this can't be done automatically (how should the scripts
determine the _sense_ of a package objectively?), but maybe this could
be implemented by some variables/flags/fields/whatever in the scripts
modfied by the RM/RAs?

I am not sure, though, if that really is worth the hassle or if this
situation is a corner case and won't happen again.

I trust your judgement :-)

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux frodo 2.4.21-rene #3 Mit Aug 6 17:21:44 CEST 2003 i686
Locale: LANG=de_DE@euro, LC_CTYPE=de_DE@euro

Grüße/Regards,

René
-- 
 .''`.  René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
 : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
 `. `'  rene@debian.org | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73
   `-   Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB  7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
      

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 00:02:28 +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:

> Package: ftp.debian.org
> Version: unavailable; reported 2003-09-16
> Severity: minor
> 
> Hi aj,
> 
> $ madison --regex myspell
> [...]
> myspell-lt | 0.5.20030624-1 |       testing | all
> myspell-lt | 0.5.20030624-1 |      unstable | all
> myspell-lv |    0.5.5-1 |       testing | source, all
> myspell-lv |    0.5.5-1 |      unstable | source, all
> 
> Hmm. This does not make much sense.
> 
> I understand that - from the view of the testing scripts - myspell-*
> (repspectively their source packages) are valid candidates and
> therefore are let into testing.
> 
britney is not a human.  Let's deal with corner cases one by one.
Closing this bug.

Cheers,
Julien


--- End Message ---

Reply to: