Bug#488751: qa.debian.org: developer.php showing incorrect information for merged bug count

2008-06-30 Thread Raphael Hertzog
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, Jay Berkenbilt wrote: > Over the last few days, I've noticed that when I go to my developer > page at http://qa.debian.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED], the > "icu" package shows "2(3)" as the number of bugs, indicating that two of > three outstanding bugs are merged. In fact, there are

Bug#488751: qa.debian.org: developer.php showing incorrect information for merged bug count

2008-06-30 Thread Jay Berkenbilt
Package: qa.debian.org Severity: normal Over the last few days, I've noticed that when I go to my developer page at http://qa.debian.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED], the "icu" package shows "2(3)" as the number of bugs, indicating that two of three outstanding bugs are merged. In fact, there are no open me

Re: RFS: goal-dash NMU's

2008-06-30 Thread Raphael Geissert
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 James Vega wrote: > On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 09:50:52PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote: >> Why do you use +nmu1 for two of them (and not for manpages-tr)? I though >> that +nmu notation was not settled yet. > > It's used by dch for native NMUs as per dis

Re: RFS: goal-dash NMU's

2008-06-30 Thread James Vega
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 09:50:52PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote: > Why do you use +nmu1 for two of them (and not for manpages-tr)? I though > that +nmu notation was not settled yet. It's used by dch for native NMUs as per discussion on -devel a couple months ago. The DEP that's currently under dis

Re: RFS: goal-dash NMU's

2008-06-30 Thread Vincent Bernat
OoO En cette fin de nuit blanche du lundi 30 juin 2008, vers 05:03, Raphael Geissert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> disait : > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/h/hexcat/hexcat_0.0.3.2+nmu1.dsc > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/manpages-tr/manpages-tr_1.0.5.1-1.1.dsc > http://mento

Bug#488634: bug in NEW/packages procedure?

2008-06-30 Thread Frank Lichtenheld
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 12:37:03PM +0400, Dmitry E. Oboukhov wrote: > Usually if the quantity of binary packages changes in an src-package > then its upload leads to the fact that the package passes the NEW > procedure again. That is not true. NEW handling is only required in the case o

Bug#488634: bug in NEW/packages procedure?

2008-06-30 Thread Dmitry E. Oboukhov
Package: qa.debian.org Usually if the quantity of binary packages changes in an src-package then its upload leads to the fact that the package passes the NEW procedure again. However it hasn't happened in the case with greasemonkey and webdeveloper, that's why there've bee