On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 03:59:01PM +0200, Manuel Prinz wrote:
> I wanted to start working on the (Debian Science) policy again in the
> very near future because there are quite some issues. I put it on my
> TODO list.
This would be great.
> If this feature is really useful for some people, we might think about
> automagically extracting the relevant information from the task pages
> and mailing the BTS, so the data is updated in only one place (task
> pages).
I've thought about the idea to have the information only on one place
but rather the other way around: If you put the WNPP bug number into
the tasks files you can extract the information from the bug report.
This approach has IMHO two advantages:
- It is consistent with other information gathering methods because
the tasks pages generating code tries to obtain information about
packages *from* *other* sources and takes the information only from
the tasks file if there is no other way to get it.
- You hardly can make a connection between tasks file and bug number
if you trigger the WNPP bug out of the tasks file information. I
see no clear way how to obtain the resulting bug number for the
tasks pages generating code.
> I once wrote a small wrapper for reportbug to include user tag
> pseudo-header fields for certain tasks (not meant as in "task pages"
> here), mainly for personal use. I could make it available if there is
> interest in it.
Â
Perhaps I'm missing something - but as I tried to explain above I
don't think that it will work this way (feel free to prove me wrong).
> Do other blends use this feature? If any effort would be made in this
> direction, blends would probably the right place.
I'd say *if* a Blend is properly maintained the Blends team watches WNPP
bugs and inserts the interesting ones in their tasks files. I do it
personally for Debian Med and I keep an eye on Debian Science - but I
might miss something here. IMHO it is just a way of consequent
documentation: Blends who did not kept an eye on usertags for WNPP bugs
will probably not be very busy maintaining their tasks files about these
packages. So I *wished* that all Blends would maintain the tasks files
accordingly - but unfortunately this is only a wish. BTW, I'm *really*
concerned about Debian Junior which is suffering from active maintenance
of the tasks files.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Klarmachen zum Ändern!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
