Yann Dirson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 03, 2001 at 07:43:47PM +0100, Edward Betts wrote: > > > Per-package tags would be useful for some things. The one that > > > triggered this idea is: > > > > > > outdated New version is available > > > > How does this have to be per-package tagging, just have a bug filed against > > each package that is out dated with the outdated tag. > > I thought of that. But when one such bug tagged "outdated" has been > reported, it does not make much sense to have a second one - they should be > merged. "outdated" is more a state of the package than a tag that could be > applied to several bugreports. > > Although it would be (implementation-wise) easier to implement right now as > a bug-level tag, I don't think it would be right to keep it as such very long.
Yes, I was thinking in terms of implementation. Yes, you file a bug to say the package is out of date: Package: foo Version: 1.99 Tag: outdated This package is out of date, there is a newer version at www.foo.org And if somebody else files another bug you merge them. > Yes. missing-man-page would be nice. does-not-build-on-hppa may be too > restrictive, however. Maybe missing-arch instead or such ? How about letting tags take a parameter so you could have: missing-man-page /usr/bin/foo missing-arch hppa file-in-non-fhs-dir /usr/doc/foo/README I think lintian would provide a starting point for a standard set of tags, then more tags for bugs that lintian could not detect can be added. Ideas: buffer-overflow segfault infinite-loop memory-leak feature-request -- Edward Betts (GPG: 1BC4E32B)
