Your message dated Sun, 31 Aug 2014 11:41:26 +0200 with message-id <20140831094126.gb5...@x230-buxy.home.ouaza.com> and subject line Re: Bug#754658: please display the package's description has caused the Debian Bug report #754658, regarding please display the package's description to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 754658: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=754658 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---Package: tracker.debian.org Severity: wishlist Thank you for this great project. I found it very good and very helpful. However I'm really missing the old page look, which is probably a matter of selecting a different css file. Can this be made per user configurable? Also on the top of the page, old PTS used to display a short description under the source package name. I can't find it anymore. Cheers, Abou Al Montacir
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---On Sat, 30 Aug 2014, Andrew Starr-Bochicchio wrote: > On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 5:29 AM, Raphael Hertzog <hert...@debian.org> wrote: > > On Fri, 29 Aug 2014, Andrew Starr-Bochicchio wrote: > >> > It should probably be a method of PackageName so that we get the short > >> > description for free in any other context... for example in the mail > >> > bot when we confirm the subscription or something like that. > >> > >> Makes sense. I think I've addressed all the other issues as well. > > > > Hum, not really, it still makes direct queries instead of relying on > > attributes of the (Source|Binary)PackageName object: > > I suspect that I'm becoming more annoying than helpful at this > point... Let's hope the third time's the charm. You're not annoying me at all. On the contrary, I'm pleased to get some help! And I don't mind spending time on reviews, in particular if you plan to help regularly (hint, hint :-)). There's at least one thing that you should have caught yourself: $ tox [...] distro_tracker/core/tests/tests_views.py:211:9: F841 local variable 'package' is assigned to but never used [...] ERROR: flake8: commands failed --- a/distro_tracker/core/tests/tests_views.py +++ b/distro_tracker/core/tests/tests_views.py @@ -210,7 +210,7 @@ class PackageViewTest(TestCase): """ package = PseudoPackageName.objects.get_or_create( name='another-package') - url = self.get_package_url(self.package) + url = self.get_package_url(package) response = self.client.get(url) response_content = response.content.decode('utf-8') And I see that the test here doesn't make much sense: checking that an empty string is present in the content will always succeed. In fact, you can consider that the test "test_pseudo_package_page" covers your test already. Also "test_short_desc_on_page_when_same" should really have at least two binary packages if we want to try to ensure that we pick the correct package name. In fact that test should really be in SourcePackageNameTest and PackageViewTest should only ensure that the short description is displayed somewhere. Doing some test without any binary package, I also noticed that it displayed a "None" instead of the expected empty string. The test test_get_short_description_with_no_binary() was only working because you had no source package in the test case (and thus you were triggering an the AttributeError exception). I fixed all this and I merged it. It's really more complex than it looks like at first hand :-) Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Discover the Debian Administrator's Handbook: → http://debian-handbook.info/get/
--- End Message ---
