Yoho, Moving this from IRC to the list:
<vorlon-work> Would it be worth considering a "testing" pseudopackage
that people could file removal requests against?
<Kamion> no problem as far as I'm concerned, although I occasionally
browse the ftp.debian.org pseudopackage. People sometimes file
bugs tagged sarge there.
<vorlon-work> hmm, that's a thought, I guess.
<vorlon-work> I'm just finding it easy to lose track of all the removal
requests coming in, the BTS seems like a good fix.
So I've been reluctant to do anything like this, because I really think
that overlaps with the RC bug list -- essentially everything in testing
with an RC bug should be removed from testing [0] and everything that
gets removed from testing should have an RC bug -- and refiling every
RC bug against some new package seems a bit silly.
Maybe we should use the "confirmed" tag on RC bugs as a cue that the
package definitely needs removing? (Or perhaps a "sarge-confirmed" tag
until version-tracking is finished)
Cheers,
aj
[0] Or the bug should be downgraded/closed, or marked sarge-ignore,
or be almost fixed and not worth the disruption (which is roughly what
"sarge-ignore" means, anyway).
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
Linux.conf.au 2004 -- Because we could.
http://conf.linux.org.au/ -- Jan 12-17, 2004
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
