Your message dated Fri, 3 Oct 2014 09:47:43 +0200
with message-id <201410030947.45335.hol...@layer-acht.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#761889: decide about desired ordering of releases and
issues
has caused the Debian Bug report #761889,
regarding decide about desired ordering of releases and issues
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
761889: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=761889
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
package: security-tracker
Hi,
the ordering of the releases (sid, jessie, wheezy...) and issues (open and
resolved CVEs, DSAs, etc) is not consistent in the tracker web ui (and was
undeterministic in parts).
So what do we have, there are basically two views:
package-centric, like https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-
package/bind9
and issue-centric, like https://security-
tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2014-0591
Both list the releases in their page header, the issue-view lists oldest
release on top, the package view is undeterministic (aka buggy, compare bind9
vs linux). So that issue #1.
The issue-view then lists affected releases, also with oldest release on top.
Then it lists releases with fixed versions, with the newest releases on top -
no, actually unsorted. So thats #2
So that should probably be fixed to also list the oldest release on top.
Agreed?
Then, the package view lists releases in the "open issues" table, with the
oldest on the left.
So except for this one issue, the releases are ordered consistently now.
Second question: is that the prefered ordering, or should newer release be on
the left/top? That's #3 even though it's just a question, thats one of the
main questions to decide here!
The second main question is the issue ordering:
In the issue view, "open issues", "open unimportant issues" and "resolved
issues" are all sorted with the oldest on top. "Security annoncements" are
sorted with the newest on top.
I think it's rather clear, that "resolved issues" should be sorted with oldest
at bottom, like the announcements. Thats #4.
Debatable (but sadly so far only debated between Salvatore and me) is whether
to list newer "open (unimportant) issues" on top or at the bottom. Salvatores
argues that currently it's easier to see what old issues havent been handled,
while my arguing is that new issues should be easier to see, as old ones are
probably known already anyway. This is #5 for the team to decide :-)
I can fix #1+#2 to make the ordering deterministic, but the team should really
decide on #3-5. Are there regular irc meetings where this could happen? Or
else, how?
cheers,
Holger
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
On Dienstag, 16. September 2014, Holger Levsen wrote:
> the ordering of the releases (sid, jessie, wheezy...) and issues (open and
> resolved CVEs, DSAs, etc) is not consistent in the tracker web ui (and was
> undeterministic in parts).
>
> So what do we have, there are basically two views:
[...]
> I can fix #1+#2 to make the ordering deterministic, but the team should
> really decide on #3-5. Are there regular irc meetings where this could
> happen? Or else, how?
I now applied and activated a patch which sorts them now in deterministic
order, in the way I think is sensible. Please speak up if you think that's not
useful.
(Next, besides fixing backports support is to add switches to in+exclude
suites on demand everywhere.)
cheers,
Holger
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
--- End Message ---
