On Tue, 27 Jul 2010, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > So that would mean they'd almost always need to be assigned to both > the pseudopackage and the original package, which I frankly find to > be a bit of a hassle.
That's why affects exists. > Additionally, tags have the interesting feature that you can limit a > query by whether or not something is tagged in a specific way. "Give > me all packages that affect powerpc or s390, but not any other > architecture" could be an interesting way to hunt for bugs related > to char signedness, which is going to be awkward using > pseudopackages. You can do the same thing using packages; there's no difference in the way that packages are searched that differentiates them from tags. The major difference between tags and pseudopackages is that mail going to a psuedopackage's maintainer works today. Mail regarding bugs containing a specific tag does not currently go anywhere, and this would have to be changed. I can change this (and in fact, generalizing this is on my todo list), but I want to avoid spending time on a solution which won't be used. Pseudopackages also have the advantage that bugs regarding buildds and such which are in the porters domain can also be assigned to a specific psuedopackage so the porters can track it. Don Armstrong -- Only one creature could have duplicated the expressions on their faces, and that would be a pigeon who has heard not only that Lord Nelson has got down off his column but has also been seen buying a 12-bore repeater and a box of cartridges. -- Terry Pratchet _Mort_ http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100727174803.gk19...@teltox.donarmstrong.com