On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 3:46 AM, Lucas Nussbaum <lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net> wrote:
> It could also report (i.e the code is there, but it's disabled > currently) on: > 7. RC bugs in stable > 8. Unfixed security issues (according to the security team tracker) Yummy, yes please! I'd suggest including oldstable RC bugs and security issues too. The security tracker lists issues fixed in stable-security but not stable (ie, no point release yet) as still open, please ensure that DDPOMail handles this appropriately. I think we can assume that most if not all stable users also use stable-security. > We (Raphael Geissert, who did most of the work on that service recently, > and me) believe those mails are useful, since we did not get too many > unsubscribe requests, and also got some "thank you" from people who use > it as a TODO list. Thank you very much for that work. > But we are constantly wondering where we should go from there. Should we > add more data (like the RC bugs in stable and the unfixed security > issues)? Or should we instead try to decrease the amount of data (to > increase the signal/noise ratio), for example by not reporting about > Lintian errors and warnings? I'd lean towards more info. I imagine others would prefer less. So perhaps a subscription setting would be useful. I'd like to echo buxy's suggestion about a web-based version, which would satisfy #461898. PET from the pkg-perl folks comes close, but isn't available for every maintainer/uploader (only specific teams who installed it) and doesn't cover everything in DDPOMail. http://pkg-perl.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/pet.cgi -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e13a36b31002131656p1e00e2aal165936278d7e1...@mail.gmail.com
