Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: minor
Tags: patch
Hi,
When a package has one 'patched' bug, the PTS now displays:
The Bug Tracking System contains patches fixing 1 bug, you should include .
as seen e.g. here: http://packages.qa.debian.org/s/sword.html
Attached patch restores the word it, that
Hi,
On Tuesday 19 February 2008 10:16, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
When a package has one 'patched' bug, the PTS now displays:
The Bug Tracking System contains patches fixing 1 bug, you should include
Actually I'm always slightly annoyed when I see this. A computer should not
tell anyone what to
On ti, 2008-02-19 at 11:23 +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
And as this isn't always right, I suggest to use a less strong wording. You
should look at.. or You could include. Or whatever. But _all_ those
patches should definitly _not_ be included.
I concur, although I suggest that the wording
On 19/02/2008, Holger Levsen wrote:
Actually I'm always slightly annoyed when I see this. A computer should not
tell anyone what to do, unless its 100% right.
And as this isn't always right, I suggest to use a less strong wording. You
should look at.. or You could include. Or whatever. But
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 12:55:32PM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
I concur, although I suggest that the wording could say that if the
patch is inappropriate, the patch tag should be removed.
No objection, but please someone come up with an appropriate wording. I
will include it, but please don't
On ti, 2008-02-19 at 13:39 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 12:55:32PM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
I concur, although I suggest that the wording could say that if the
patch is inappropriate, the patch tag should be removed.
No objection, but please someone come up
On Tuesday 19 February 2008 11:55, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
On ti, 2008-02-19 at 11:23 +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
And as this isn't always right, I suggest to use a less strong wording.
You should look at.. or You could include. Or whatever. But _all_
those patches should definitly _not_ be
On ti, 2008-02-19 at 14:14 +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
On Tuesday 19 February 2008 11:55, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
On ti, 2008-02-19 at 11:23 +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
And as this isn't always right, I suggest to use a less strong wording.
You should look at.. or You could include. Or
On Tuesday 19 February 2008 14:29, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
Perhaps The Bug Tracking System contains patches fixing 3 bugs, you
should consider including or untagging them. then? Two additional
words. :)
Patch updated :-)
Thijs
Index: pts/www/xsl/pts.xsl
Hi,
On Tuesday 19 February 2008 14:14, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
The Bug Tracking System contains patches fixing 3 bugs, you should
consider including them or removing the patch tag from the bugs.
Wonderful :)
regards,
Holger
pgp3pItQSo1XP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Lars Wirzenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The Bug Tracking System contains patches fixing 3 bugs, you should
consider including them or removing the patch tag from the bugs.
Slightly more idiomatic:
X bugs in the Bug Tracking System are tagged as having patches.
Either they should be
11 matches
Mail list logo
