Personally I would prefer to keep m.d.n simple and not having all of REVU's "features". I'm giving some comments on the features and how I would prefer to be added to m.d.n
On 27/07/07, Paul Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 7/27/07, Christoph Haas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > So if anyone could tell me what features REVU has that m.d.n is lacking > > then I'll consider adding them in the next release. I'm not active in > > Ubuntu so I can't tell how things work there. I just see the commenting > > feature and colorful icons there. ;) > > >From a cursory look at both web pages and the REVU wiki pages; > > Uploads are based on date/time of the upload rather than version > numbers and all of them are kept. Instead of only using dates (not to mention the lack of year) it should also display the package version. And I don't think it would be very useful to keep all versions (maybe only the comments and purge them after some time). > > Automated archiving of uploaded packages (last I checked, there were > still some packages on mentors/sponsor-pkglist that have been > uploaded) - 2 examples are paris-traceroute and monotone > This depends on the definition of 'archiving'. It would be nice to have the package deleted from m.d.n when it is uploaded so maintainers are able to choose the package sponsor's status (e.g. when looking for a sponsor). > > Automated interdiffs between successive uploads (might be nice to > extend this to the versions in the archive) As I said above, maybe useful to keep them for some versions and during a period of time. > > Per-upload commenting Same as above > > I can view the diff.gz files in my browser > > Can mark comments as 'advocating an upload' By the way, is there any way to make sure that the person marking a comment as 'advocating an upload' is really a DD (or in REVU's case UD, if that's how they call them :-/ ) > > Unpacked source trees I think it is easier to download the package files and check everything in the local computer than browsing every single file with a web browser. Otherwise I would expect the online file viewer to have syntax colouring and that kind of things. > > Lintian/linda output > > FTBFS checks What kind of checks does it perform? > > Changes in upstream tarball (mentioned on > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Packages/REVU/REVU-Tools) > > Source code > > checking for a debian/watch > > new upstream available? > > debian native package? > > Would be nice to also have autorejects of packages with broken Build-Depends > > -- > bye, > pabs > > http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Atomo64 - Raphael Please avoid sending me Word, PowerPoint or Excel attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html Say NO to Microsoft Office broken standard. See http://www.noooxml.org/petition -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]