Masato Taruishi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Adam Heath wrote: > > > > On IRC, I was suggested that apt-listbugs should use index.db. I had to > > > use debbugs .status file too because index.db doesn't have subject. > > > > > > apt-listbugs fetches just few static files from web server, two index > > > files and .status files of actual critical bugs. So if 5 critical > > > bugs are found, total 7 static files are downloaded. apt-listbugs > > > can be used via normal proxy servers. > > > > Requesting those files isn't itself causing load. I just don't like that > > the > > debbugs database is exported that way. > > I agree. debbugs database is an internal format and not interface to > other programs. Actually, I wanted a released interface to access bts > other than cgi because it's slow and can't be cached easily. But > there was no fast interface to fetch bug reports. There is e-mail > interface, but it's little complex to manage database. I prefer LDAP > interface rather than e-mail interface. I'm sorry, but I'm not on > debbugs-ml. Is there any plan to implement LDAP interface? (There is > LDAP interface, but it searches debbugs dynmically and therefore slow > and no-indexing).
Afaik its already there: See wnpp-mail for an example: http://cvs.infodrom.org/tools/master/wnpp-mail?rev=1.8&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup&cvsroot=infodrom&only_with_tag=HEAD MfG Goswin
