Re: RFH: APT
On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Adam Heath wrote:
> I am willing to manage releases, builds, and uploads. Even doing
> documentation tweaks, etc. However, I am not familiar enough with the
> nitty-gritty details of the dependency resolving api, so would not be able to
> do work in that area.
Well, I think that is worth trying. Please go ahead and put something in
experimental and see what happens.
> > But there are still a number of odd corner cases that people find, and of
> > course spelling errors in the man pages, plus a couple of larger issues.
> Do you have time to give more detail about these cases? Does apt have a test
> suite, of any style/kind?
You touched on a few of them at the end. The new version stuff, new
Release files, signed Release files and translated package descriptions
are the most evident missing functions.
There is no test suite per-say, but through all the configuration stuff
you can create isolated test environments.
> Is it possible that some bugs have been fixed in cvs, but not noted in the
> changelog, and not noted in the bts?
Perhaps, but I don't think it is very likely. I haven't fixed a problem
not reported in the BTS in a very long time.
> Do you have more information about these problems? Do you have a way to
> duplicate them?
Thomas's problem package file is one, last time I tried it though it
didn't happen here. The new gettext i18n stuff is also pretty screwed up,
the translation files are very old. The po directory apparently doesn't
build on SMP either because of a bad assumption I made, the make-hackary
to fix that is unfortunately rather involved though.
I'm not sure what else, I'd have to review a diff against 0.5.4 someday..