On Sun, Mar 06, 2005 at 10:49:47AM +0100, Martin Quinson wrote: > [Why to cc on policy? Cut] > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 03:32:30AM +0100, Bluefuture wrote: > > > >If people don't care as much about this as you think they should, > > >perhaps it would be a good idea to try explaining why they *should* > > >care, instead of just lamenting their lack of a telepathic > > >understanding of your intentions? > > > > This is not true. Had u tried to do a search about dehs/watch on > > debian-devel about 2004/2005? > > I didn't. Just change the content of this mail into one of the pages of your > site, and you're set. > > > I'm not a debian developer, so i could not post on dda mailing list. I > > had opened many thread over this months on debian-qa debian-devel about > > dehs issues. The only reply are: > > > > 1) Dehs is useless. > > 2) Submitting 6229 wishlist bug is not possible/is not the solution > > (without proposing alternatives method) > > > > I had try to randomly submit wishlist bugs for 6 packages to bts with > > the tag "patch" pointing to the dehs site or attaching the watch file to > > the bug. > > Almost all of this bug was closed and the watch file was check (in some > > cases fixed) and inserted in the package on the next upload. > > So, you got the way to go. Please go ahead and submit those 6229 bugs.
NO! Do *not* file 6229 bugs about the same subject. Never. Adding a watchfile is up to the maintainer. It's a feature offered to maintainers, they can use it if the wish. If a watchfile for a package makes sense (for quite some packages it doesn't) I think it's useful. In no case should 6229 bugs be filed about these watchfiles that don't have ANY effect on the resulting binary packages. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
