Re: RFC: transitioning towards using BTS versioning for NMUs (and experimental)
On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 12:44:40PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > "Steinar H. Gunderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >[Don suggested to use the tags _and_ the versioning information in a > >transitional period; I'm not 100% sure what this buys us, except that I'm > >not sure how well britney would cope without.] > > 4. Run a script over the archive (like the one I made a while ago -- sources > >available for anyone who needs it :-) ) to remove all the instance of > >these two tags, and replace them by versioned closes. > > Does that mean one can't get a list of bugs fixed in NMUs anymore? As > maintainer one might want to read up on those bugs specificaly without > having to parse the changelog for bug numbers. The BTS shows "Fixed in X.X.X-Y" in the bug summary list, I think. It doesn't seem like it'd be hard to add a "fixed-in=X.X.X-Y" parameter to the query string if debbugs doesn't have that already -- that way you could get a *better* report of bugs fixed in the latest NMU. - Matt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFC: transitioning towards using BTS versioning for NMUs (and experimental)
"Steinar H. Gunderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 05:15:02PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: >> Since our default development suite is unstable, IMHO, does make sense >> to see bugs in previous versions that are solved in unstable. > > Well, what do you propose as criteria for showing that? What do you mean by > "previous versions" -- everything back to 1.0-1? Show the bugs that has the fixes in unstable already. -- O T A V I OS A L V A D O R - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN: 5906116 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855 Home Page: http://www.freedom.ind.br/otavio - "Microsoft gives you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFC: transitioning towards using BTS versioning for NMUs (and experimental)
"Steinar H. Gunderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >[Don suggested to use the tags _and_ the versioning information in a >transitional period; I'm not 100% sure what this buys us, except that I'm >not sure how well britney would cope without.] > 4. Run a script over the archive (like the one I made a while ago -- sources >available for anyone who needs it :-) ) to remove all the instance of >these two tags, and replace them by versioned closes. Does that mean one can't get a list of bugs fixed in NMUs anymore? As maintainer one might want to read up on those bugs specificaly without having to parse the changelog for bug numbers. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFC: transitioning towards using BTS versioning for NMUs (and experimental)
On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 05:15:02PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > Since our default development suite is unstable, IMHO, does make sense > to see bugs in previous versions that are solved in unstable. Well, what do you propose as criteria for showing that? What do you mean by "previous versions" -- everything back to 1.0-1? > We can have a link for the other suites showing the bugs of them there > as an option. Makes simple and clear for us, IMHO. This is already there, right at the bottom. It could be made more accessible, though. > Ahh, of course. This will be awesome to have working! It'll mean that > uploads for unstable don't need to reinclude all closes that were > close in experimental anymore. Perfect. Yes, that's one of the advantages. :-) > Thank you very much for your and Don's work on BTS :-) I'm afraid my contribution to the BTS code is near-zero; you probably mean Andreas Barth. I'm prepared to put code behind my suggestions if nobody else wants to, though. /* Steinar */ -- Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFC: transitioning towards using BTS versioning for NMUs (and experimental)
"Steinar H. Gunderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >[Don Armstrong had a different suggestion here: Make the default view show >anything applicable to unstable, _plus_ anything that is not marked as >fixed in any version. I don't believe the difference is all that >big.] Since our default development suite is unstable, IMHO, does make sense to see bugs in previous versions that are solved in unstable. We can have a link for the other suites showing the bugs of them there as an option. Makes simple and clear for us, IMHO. Ahh, of course. This will be awesome to have working! It'll mean that uploads for unstable don't need to reinclude all closes that were close in experimental anymore. Perfect. Thank you very much for your and Don's work on BTS :-) -- O T A V I OS A L V A D O R - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN: 5906116 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855 Home Page: http://www.freedom.ind.br/otavio - "Microsoft gives you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
