On Sat, 3 Dec, 2005 at 17:15:58 +, Colin Watson wrote:
yaclc provides this.
I also have bug #316385: [process.in] allow for process.in commands
to restrict themselves to a specific package (like service.in).
Presently the BTS doesn't seem to have this functionality, but it
would probably not
On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 02:10:05AM +0100, Simon Richter wrote:
The problem here would be that said test requires network connectivity,
while the rest of lintian does not.
Indeed. Adding such a test to dput seems to me a better idea. dput
already has the need of network connectivity, it can
On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 02:01:28PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
A lintian-like test to see if the listed bugs match the package before
uploading seems more useful to me. It would have prevented this
particular problem.
yaclc provides this.
--
Colin Watson
On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 12:53:51AM +0100, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
* Peter Samuelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [051202 00:33]:
This has been suggested before; the standard counterargument is what
about closing an ITP?
Then why not make a check (source package of bug and changelog are the
same)
On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 10:45:31AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is dig through the Perl code
in merkel:/org/bugs.debian.org/scripts and work out how to add this
functionality. grin
- Matt
Maybe it is a good thing that I am neither a DD (yet)
Hi,
Matthew Palmer wrote:
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is dig through the Perl code
in merkel:/org/bugs.debian.org/scripts and work out how to add this
functionality. grin
You can use package foo as a command to control@ to tell it ignore
everything that does not affect
Simon Richter wrote:
Matthew Palmer wrote:
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is dig through the Perl
code in merkel:/org/bugs.debian.org/scripts and work out how to add
this functionality. grin
You can use package foo as a command to control@ to tell it ignore
everything
On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 03:03, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
Simon Richter wrote:
Matthew Palmer wrote:
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is dig through the Perl
code in merkel:/org/bugs.debian.org/scripts and work out how to add
this functionality. grin
You can use package foo as a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
Simon Richter wrote:
Matthew Palmer wrote:
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is dig through the Perl
code in merkel:/org/bugs.debian.org/scripts and work out how to add
this functionality. grin
You can use
Hi Matt,
if that would help, I'd include a (n option that allows to) check via
bts2ldap + the attached script into dput.
That'd be less intrusive than changing the behaviour of Closes:, for
better or worse.
Kind regards
T.
--
Thomas Viehmann, http://thomas.viehmann.net/
#!/usr/bin/python
Thomas Viehmann wrote:
if sys.stdin.readline()[1:] not in ['y','Y']:
For added utility I might want to improve on that.
Kind regards
T.
--
Thomas Viehmann, http://thomas.viehmann.net/
'What'll we drink to?' Nick asked, holding up the glass.
'Let's drink to testing,' Bill said.
'All right,'
A lintian-like test to see if the listed bugs match the package before
uploading seems more useful to me. It would have prevented this
particular problem.
Perhaps I am sloppy, but I often find it useful to close some bug in a
changelog that I might not necessary have taken the time or remembered
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A lintian-like test to see if the listed bugs match the package before
uploading seems more useful to me. It would have prevented this
particular problem.
IMHO, is the best and easier alternative.
--
O T A V I OS A L V A D O R
On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 02:22:41PM +0100, Simon Richter wrote:
Matthew Palmer wrote:
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is dig through the Perl code
in merkel:/org/bugs.debian.org/scripts and work out how to add this
functionality. grin
You can use package foo as a command to
Hi,
Joey Hess schrieb:
A lintian-like test to see if the listed bugs match the package before
uploading seems more useful to me. It would have prevented this
particular problem.
The problem here would be that said test requires network connectivity,
while the rest of lintian does not.
I just had a bug that I opened (#339832) closed by a changelog entry in
a new debconf upload. This is apparently a typo, as the changelog entry
claims that the bug it was closing was related to a Swedish translation
update.
My bug was a wishlist bug against gmessage asking for it to become an
On Thursday 01 December 2005 23:45, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Is there a way to not allow changelog entries to automatically close
bugs assigned to other packages?
This sounds like a usefull restriction. I've seen enough cases where the
wrong bug was closed to see the benefit of this.
If the
[Roberto C. Sanchez]
Is there a way to not allow changelog entries to automatically close
bugs assigned to other packages?
This has been suggested before; the standard counterargument is what
about closing an ITP?
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 05:45:53PM -0500, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
I just had a bug that I opened (#339832) closed by a changelog entry in
a new debconf upload. This is apparently a typo, as the changelog entry
claims that the bug it was closing was related to a Swedish translation
update.
On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 05:33:11PM -0600, Peter Samuelson wrote:
[Roberto C. Sanchez]
Is there a way to not allow changelog entries to automatically close
bugs assigned to other packages?
This has been suggested before; the standard counterargument is what
about closing an ITP?
There
* Peter Samuelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [051202 00:33]:
This has been suggested before; the standard counterargument is what
about closing an ITP?
Then why not make a check (source package of bug and changelog are the
same) or (bug to be closed is an ITP)?
Yours sincerely,
Alexander
--
21 matches
Mail list logo
