Andreas Tille <[email protected]> writes: > On Sun, Dec 06, 2015 at 01:23:12PM +0100, Ole Streicher wrote: >> * For packages in NEW, the ITP and the git repository would still as >> useful as for the "packaging started" section. Is there a reason, by >> blendtasktools doesn't keep them? > > I guess I simple wrote the ftpnew importer before I had the idea to also > fetch these data. For sure it is relevant - I think I need to store > this information in UDD.
They are alredy fetched for the "started" packages, so one would just need to (re-)enable them for the NEW packages, right? >> * d/u/metadata contains fields for the upstream RCS and upstream bug >> repository. Can they be read out by blendtasktools? > > Currently the only data imported from d/u/metadata are the publication > data. I agree that in the long run everything should be imported. If you would point me to the place where this is done in bdt.py, I could do this as well. >> * Can I get the number of RC bugs and the total number of bugs via >> blendtasktools? This would significantly increase the usability :-) >> Also, the CI test result would be great here. > Yes. Left column of > > http://blends.debian.org/med/bugs/bio.html > > or similar. I will take the bug info from there -- what about CI? I am still not sure in how much this all duplicates the QA pages: does it really make sense to have blends-private Todo-Lists and blends-private Bugs pages with an interface totally different from the QA? Best regards Ole
