On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 02:22:07PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > Firstly, thanks for implementing this. I didn't expect anyone to pick > it up, let alone so quickly! > > Thoughts: > > debian-volatile has been replaced by the squeeze-updates suite. > > I don't think it should warn about this issue in oldstable/stable nor > backports. > > Adding experimental is a good idea.
I don't think that experimental is important enough to add, but I understand that some PTS users prefer it added, so I'll add it. It causes an increase of 1278-1256=22 messages, which is very acceptable. One example of a difference between unstable and experimental is that libcmis in experimental build-depends on docbook-to-man with RFA 549475. > > It might be a good idea to add RFH to the mix. Maybe for packages with > no RFA/O deps, add any RFH deps. Interesting idea, however this would add 2996 messages, with 1475 messages only for quilt. I'm not sure about repeating RFHs on so many PTS pages. On the one hand RFHs for packages with so many reverse dependencies deserve more visibility, but on the other hand if we put too many messages on the PTS pages then people won't read them anymore. Other opinions on this ? Regards, Bart Martens -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121217072007.gf25...@master.debian.org
