On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 09:54:26AM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote: > On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 08:26:57AM +0100, Osamu Aoki wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 03:51:45PM +0100, Javier Fern�ndez-Sanguino Pe�a > > wrote: > <snip/> > > > Understood. Maybe the numbers, howevers, would be appropiate as well as > > > tips on how to find why package X is not in the release (maybe pointing > > > to > > > ftp.debian.org's BTS entry, the WNPP, etc...) > > > > I do not think we have such an entry for BTS but this is an excellent > > idea. Virtual BTS entry name like "release-sarge" which get tended by > > release note maintainer(s) will be nice. Then we can reference them as: > > http://bugs.debian.org/release-sarge > > s/release-sarge/release-sarge-doc/ > > To prevent random sarge bugreports against the "doc" package of sarge.
Well the idea was to have bug reports for each package that has been removed. The way I envision it working is that the bug that caused the package to removed RC or bug against ftp.debian.org asking for its removal would be reassigned to a "release" virtual package. These bugs could then be closed once the release to be is turned into oldstable. Cheers, Rob -- Rob Bradford http://www.robster.org.uk | GPG: DF81EE83
