Your message dated Thu, 6 Oct 2005 14:25:33 +1000
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#129781: bugs.debian.org: BTS needs support for bug
dependencies/blocking
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 18 Jan 2002 07:34:45 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jan 18 01:34:45 2002
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from as5800-83-26.access.naxs.com (silk.kitenet.net) [216.98.83.26]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 16RTXw-0005m1-00; Fri, 18 Jan 2002 01:34:44 -0600
Received: from joey by silk.kitenet.net with local (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian))
id 16RTYc-0005sX-00; Fri, 18 Jan 2002 02:35:26 -0500
From: Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: bugs.debian.org: BTS needs support for bug dependencies/blocking
X-Reportbug-Version: 1.41.14213
X-Mailer: reportbug 1.41.14213
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 02:35:25 -0500
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: bugs.debian.org
Version: N/A; reported 2002-01-18
Severity: wishlist
Reassign to debbugs if necessary.
The BTS should support a mechanism to say "this bug can't be fixed until
this other bug, over here, is fixed" (another way to express this is
"this bug is blocking a fix of this other bug"; the info can be entered
in two different ways conceivably). This info should be displayed when
you look at a bug, so you can see the list of other bugs it is blocking,
and the list of bugs that are blocking it. Other modern BTS's support
this kind of thing, and it would be very useful for Debian too. Some
sample uses:
- Perhaps the most common is the obvious case, a bug in package A can't
be fixed until something is done with package B. Maybe package A needs
to be upgraded to a new upstream version, but cannot be until B is
also upgraded, or whatever.
- Bug dependencies can be used to group together bugs we need to fix to
complete some larger task. For example, all RC bugs in base packages are
blocking the task of freezing standard (eg, it depends on those bugs),
which might be a bug on ftp.debian.org or something similar. Or a while
ago, we could have set all the bugs about files in /usr/doc to block a
"debian violates FHS with /usr/doc" bug filed on general. This may eclipse
most of what tags can do (and some of what severity levels are being used
for), in a much more flexible, open-ended way.
- And it can be used for bugs within a single package too of course.
Probably a lot of things that are currently tagged wontfix are just
waiting on some larger issue to be resolved in their package. I know I
could use this to good effect on my packages anyway.
I think making this information explicit in the bug tracking system
would lead to some useful changes in the way we look at bugs; seeing
that some random bug on your package is preventing 10 other bugs on
other packages from being fixed can be a good motivator. Probably more
motivating than receiving yet another falsely grave bug report anyway.
I don't think this will be significantly harder to implement than tags
were. There are plenty of possibilities for interesting wrinkles like
graphing bug dependency trees that could be done later, but it really
just comes down to adding a new field for this data to the bug info
files, probably adding another one of those nasty indexes I've heard
about, and updating the control bot and the CGI's to manipulate and
display the new field.
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 129781-done) by bugs.debian.org; 6 Oct 2005 04:25:34 +0000
>From [email protected] Wed Oct 05 21:25:34 2005
Return-path: <[email protected]>
Received: from azure.humbug.org.au (azure.erisian.com.au) [66.179.181.62]
(Debian-exim)
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1ENNK2-0007yY-00; Wed, 05 Oct 2005 21:25:34 -0700
Received: from aj by azure.erisian.com.au with local (Exim 4.50 #1 (Debian))
id 1ENNK1-000252-Nz; Thu, 06 Oct 2005 14:25:33 +1000
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 14:25:33 +1000
From: Anthony Towns <[email protected]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Bug#129781: bugs.debian.org: BTS needs support for bug
dependencies/blocking
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
> My original patch implementing blocking included a patch to the
> documentation.
Which is now applied (more or less), along with the actual
implementation. This might take a little while to actually show up on
the website. Bug closed with this message.
Cheers,
aj
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
