On 2012-02-07 06:31, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 01:29:06AM -0500, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
On 2012-02-06 19:19, Mark Brown wrote:
They are completely incomprehensibe in and of themselves, one needs to
go find the BTS to figure out what they are.
I was not aware that comprehensibility was a property of numbers.
Numbers are just numbers, there is no need to do anything with the
BTS to figure out what a number is.
Oh, come on. Now you're just trolling.
If you can't explain how numbers could be incomprehensible, please admit
they aren't, or just say nothing. Name-calling will not help you or
anyone understand anything.
This is actually a bug, see #585110.
Do you consider this as non-parsable?
Yes, it is just a bald assertation which contains no explanation about
why you believe this to be the case.
If you understood the explanation, I fail to see why you call it
non-parsable.
It doesn't contain any actual content about what you're doing, it's
adding nothing on top of the otherwise unexplained merge command.
I disagree, but in any case, that doesn't make the explanation non-parsable.
This issue does concern me, and I follow this guideline myself, obviously.
This is not the case, at least not in this example.
Why do you think so?
I think I've been perfectly clear - as I've repeatedly said BTS numbers
aren't directly parsable and you need to explain what you're doing.
I don't think so. Again, I fail to see how a number could be
non-parsable, directly or indirectly.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
