Re: Raw Idea: one more control field for sponsors
Bernd Zeimetz writes (Re: Raw Idea: one more control field for sponsors): On 08/13/2010 06:22 PM, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: How? The changes file might not contain the sponsor not the control file. You can get the keyid of the sponsor from the changes file. But would people be happy to recieve bug reports on the email address of their gpg key? And which uid do you use? You use usern...@debian.org. The key-id of the uploader is tracked anyway, so there is not much missing. Debian developers are not required to use or accept mail at their @debian.org address. I don't, because of spam. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/19561.4940.861788.647...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: Raw Idea: one more control field for sponsors
Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au writes: Toni Mueller t...@debian.org writes: while working on a package I'm going to sponsor, it occurred to me with all the DD, DM and sponsoring going on, that I'd like to have a field in debian/control, like eg. Bugs-To: some...@debian.org, ... In the source package stanza, or the binary package stanza? to have some...@debian.org automatically subscribed to the bugs for this package, much in the same vein as the 'Uploaders:' field works. This appears to duplicate functionality of the Package Tracking System URL:http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/resources.html#pkg-tracking-system. Why is the PTS insufficient for this purpose? (I'm not weighing in either way, I just think that adding duplicate behaviour needs justification one way or another.) I would think this could be usefull if it wouldn't subscribe the person to the PTS permanently but only for as long as the package exists in the archive. This could then be used by one-shot sponsors and NMUers so they do get bug reports for as long as the sponsored/NMUed package exist. But if the next upload is sponsored by someone else or the NMU acknowledged they would stop getting bug reports. The PTS is insufficient for this purpose as it can't automatically unsubscribe people when their package is superceeded. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87k4nu4z0j@frosties.localdomain
Re: Raw Idea: one more control field for sponsors
On 08/13/2010 11:56 AM, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: The PTS is insufficient for this purpose as it can't automatically unsubscribe people when their package is superceeded. That should not be too hard to implement without an extra control field. -- Bernd ZeimetzDebian GNU/Linux Developer http://bzed.dehttp://www.debian.org GPG Fingerprints: 06C8 C9A2 EAAD E37E 5B2C BE93 067A AD04 C93B FF79 ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c655f5f.2070...@bzed.de
Re: Raw Idea: one more control field for sponsors
Bernd Zeimetz be...@bzed.de writes: On 08/13/2010 11:56 AM, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: The PTS is insufficient for this purpose as it can't automatically unsubscribe people when their package is superceeded. That should not be too hard to implement without an extra control field. How? The changes file might not contain the sponsor not the control file. You can get the keyid of the sponsor from the changes file. But would people be happy to recieve bug reports on the email address of their gpg key? And which uid do you use? MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87mxsqtrc4@frosties.localdomain
Re: Raw Idea: one more control field for sponsors
On 08/13/2010 06:22 PM, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: Bernd Zeimetz be...@bzed.de writes: On 08/13/2010 11:56 AM, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: The PTS is insufficient for this purpose as it can't automatically unsubscribe people when their package is superceeded. That should not be too hard to implement without an extra control field. How? The changes file might not contain the sponsor not the control file. You can get the keyid of the sponsor from the changes file. But would people be happy to recieve bug reports on the email address of their gpg key? And which uid do you use? You use usern...@debian.org. The key-id of the uploader is tracked anyway, so there is not much missing. -- Bernd ZeimetzDebian GNU/Linux Developer http://bzed.dehttp://www.debian.org GPG Fingerprints: 06C8 C9A2 EAAD E37E 5B2C BE93 067A AD04 C93B FF79 ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c660240.1080...@bzed.de
Re: Raw Idea: one more control field for sponsors
Toni Mueller t...@debian.org writes: while working on a package I'm going to sponsor, it occurred to me with all the DD, DM and sponsoring going on, that I'd like to have a field in debian/control, like eg. Bugs-To: some...@debian.org, ... In the source package stanza, or the binary package stanza? to have some...@debian.org automatically subscribed to the bugs for this package, much in the same vein as the 'Uploaders:' field works. This appears to duplicate functionality of the Package Tracking System URL:http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/resources.html#pkg-tracking-system. Why is the PTS insufficient for this purpose? (I'm not weighing in either way, I just think that adding duplicate behaviour needs justification one way or another.) -- \ “To save the world requires faith and courage: faith in reason, | `\and courage to proclaim what reason shows to be true.” | _o__)—Bertrand Russell | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87y6cdw8z3@benfinney.id.au
Re: Raw Idea: one more control field for sponsors
Hi, Toni Mueller wrote: in debian/control, like eg. Bugs-To: some...@debian.org, ... This is the info which IMHO belongs to PTS and should stay there. I have found out that there are other ways to get at the bug reports for some random package, but this could probably simplify things from the perspective of a sponsor. I consider PTS's fill-a-field-and-click much easier than changing a package. I don't think this info (bug sending and handling) belongs to package control files. I would also like to know whether you think it is a good idea that a sponsor be automatically subscribed to the bugs for all packages he sponsors. I think it's a good idea, but this probably belongs to another thread. -- Eugene V. Lyubimkin aka JackYF, JID: jackyf.devel(maildog)gmail.com C++/Perl developer, Debian Developer signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Raw Idea: one more control field for sponsors
Hi, On Wed, 11.08.2010 at 17:48:09 +0300, Eugene V. Lyubimkin jac...@debian.org wrote: Toni Mueller wrote: in debian/control, like eg. Bugs-To: some...@debian.org, ... This is the info which IMHO belongs to PTS and should stay there. after rethinking the issue, I agree that it's better to not add a field to the debian/control file. Originally, I thought it would simplify things, but I'm no longer convinced. -- Kind regards, --Toni++ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100811211823.3697.qm...@oak.oeko.net
