Thanks Jay for this. I basically agree with all you wrote.
On 06/10/2015 07:51 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: > I don't believe the Ops Tags team should be curating the packaging tags > -- the packaging community should do that, and do that under the main > openstack/governance repository. > > Packagers, I would love it if you would curate a set of tags that looks > kind of like this: > > - packaged:centos:kilo > - packaged:ubuntu:liberty > - packaged:sles:juno As you wrote, the list will be *very* outdated *very* fast. I don't see the point of having such tagging scheme, when all is available in a central place [1] already. I'm not happy either with the fact that there would be only a single "apt" definition for the quality, when Debian & Ubuntu packages are different. Especially when I take a great care of reducing the number of bugs within the Debian tracker [2]. I've raised the issue multiple times on the blueprint, but I basically got ignored. If we want this blueprint to get through, please take into account remarks that reviewers are making. Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo) [1] https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=openstack-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?which=maint&data=openstack-devel%40lists.alioth.debian.org&archive=no&raw=yes&bug-rev=yes&pend-exc=fixed&pend-exc=done Note on this URL: Yes, only 6 buts reported currently opened in Debian, out of 242 packages. And with 5 of the bugs needing upstream actions (getting out of suds, pyeclib needing a new release), and one pending Debian FTP masters approval of the package. It's like zero actionable bugs to me!!! Please do submit a bug, and I'll do my best to close it in a record time... _______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
