On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 03:37:19PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 03:28:34PM +0200, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote: > > Its an already existing tool. But indeed an interesting question. > > It is an existing tool, ... which was going to disappear. So I think > it is reasonable to ask whether it should really be saved or not.
Yep, I figured that you eventually meant that. But it wasn't unambigious to say "do we need _yet another_ tool", so I thought making this clear wouldn't be bad. > > > If the check is all it does, it looks like a simple "--check" option > > > can be added to tagpending to achieve the same effect. > > > > I don't know if this matches the use-case. AFAICS yacls is meant to > > be used as a dput hook or so, to tell you "OH! WAIT! You are gonna > > close the wrong bugs if you really upload now" > > Yep, that's clear. The reasoning for associating the two is that > blatantly they deal with the same entities: last changelog entry, BTS > inquiry about open bugs and owning packages. Before joining the burden > of maintaining both, now in the same package, I cannot help thinking > whether there is an alternative :-) ACK. > Regarding your dput hook use case, which is a really interesting one, > I don't see a problem in that hook being encoded as "tagpending > --check", you write once, you stop thinking about it forever. Well, its not mine. I just heard about that idea, when I've thrown a short look into the package ;) > That said, I do agree that the name of the tool (tagpending) could > become non-intuitive. So my proposal is to actually add the option to > tagpending *and* to have an additional symlink under /usr/bin, > pointing to tagpending, which would just mimic the (future) behavior > of the tagpending check. How does that sound? Sounds reasoable. And in consequence RM yacls, once this is done. Best Regards, Patrick -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
