Re: tasks files maintence (Re: RFS: graph isomorphism)
On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 10:37:31AM -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> For me, joining the blends group is fine.
bremner-guest added to Blends project.
> But in the long run I think
> moving into debian-science svn would make it more a natural part of
> the team workflow, rather than something you have to manage/encourage
> by asking about what task a given new package goes in.
Well, if it's only the workflos SVN knows external resources. These
are used to put debian-edu and debian-gis source into the blends
repository and in turn we might be able to do this in the Debian
Science project as well (but I guess proper permissions are needed).
I agree that its debatable where to keep the original source for
the tasks file - but up to now nobody insisted on moving it and
I'm not heavily motivated to change a running system.
> Or maybe there is some alioth magic that could make all debian-science
> members automatic members of blends.
I don't think that there is such a magic. IMHO the only chance is
to open it for all alioth members. I would not have real problems
with this approach because I'm reading the commit list - but for the
moment there was not much need to do so.
> Would that be desirable from a
> blends point of view delegate adding users like that? It doesn't
> matter so much where the svn is I guess, I'm mainly thinking the extra
> adminstrative hoop.
Considering the number of really interested people it was easily
maintainable.
> On a related topic it would be nice if there was some semi-automatic
> way to smooth the flow of ITPs into the tasks files.
This would actually be a nice thing, but I have no idea how to
approach this. Currently I'm watching ITPs as far as my time
permits and just copy the information which is not that hard
if proper ITPs are filed.
> Perhaps
> something along the lines of the Package Entropy Tracker watching the
> git repos. Perhaps something useful will come out of the pkg-perl
> teams investigations of git.
Well, one slight chance I see is that ITPs might be moved in a
structured way to UDD and we just pick by bug number. But that's
a lot of work for only one use case (I do not see much other use
for this information in UDD) and does not seem to be worth the
effort.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Klarmachen zum Ändern!
Reply to: