Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi everybody, I've written a set of scripts which read the no_upstream.html page of DEHS[1] hoping to notify the maintainers of the packages listed there about the debian/watch file not reporting upstream's version. The scripts also perform some chec

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

Hi, > [1] http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/no_upstream.html could you add the Maintainer of the packages to this listing? Makes searching for your own packages much more simple. Thanks, Bernd -- Bernd Zeimetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, ema

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

Hi, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: > Hi, > >> [1] http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/no_upstream.html > > could you add the Maintainer of the packages to this listing? Makes > searching for your own packages much more simple. I'm not involved with the DEHS project so I can't change anything there. > > Thank

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

On 04/11/07 at 18:44 -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi everybody, > > I've written a set of scripts which read the no_upstream.html page of > DEHS[1] hoping to notify the maintainers of the packages listed there about > the debian/watch file n

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

> However, if you are interested in that stuff, it could be a good idea to > contact the DEHS maintainer: there might be a way to integrate this into > DEHS, and avoid the HTML parsing ;) Didn't look into them, but http://qa.debian.org/data/dehs/ looks interesting. -- Bernd Zeimetz <[EMAIL PRO

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

Bernd Zeimetz wrote: >> [1] http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/no_upstream.html > could you add the Maintainer of the packages to this listing? Makes > searching for your own packages much more simple. No, let's not. We have too many questionable outdated pages listing maintainer names as is (e.g. [1])

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

[I read the list, no need to send me the message directly ;-)] Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > I like the idea, and think that you should go ahead with reporting the > bugs. > > However, if you are interested in that stuff, it could be a good idea to > contact the DEHS maintainer: there might be a way

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

* Raphael Geissert [Mon, 05 Nov 2007 16:19:02 -0600]: > I'll let my scripts send all the reports tomorrow afternoon, GMT-6). Oh, if reporting is scripted, make like 120% sure they won't go astray. > It would of course be easier if there was some other kind of way to retrieve > information from t

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

Bernd Zeimetz wrote: > >> However, if you are interested in that stuff, it could be a good idea to >> contact the DEHS maintainer: there might be a way to integrate this into >> DEHS, and avoid the HTML parsing ;) > > Didn't look into them, but http://qa.debian.org/data/dehs/ looks > interesting.

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

Adeodato Simó wrote: > * Raphael Geissert [Mon, 05 Nov 2007 16:19:02 -0600]: > >> I'll let my scripts send all the reports tomorrow afternoon, GMT-6). > > Oh, if reporting is scripted, make like 120% sure they won't go astray. I can assure you that ;-) It is pretty straightforward and as you can

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

On Mon, 05 Nov 2007, Raphael Geissert wrote: > Adeodato Simó wrote: > > * Raphael Geissert [Mon, 05 Nov 2007 16:19:02 -0600]: > >> It would of course be easier if there was some other kind of way > >> to retrieve information from the BTS other than email and SOAP. > > > > Why is SOAP not appropria

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

On 05/11/07 at 16:19 -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote: > Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > I like the idea, and think that you should go ahead with reporting the > > bugs. > > > > However, if you are interested in that stuff, it could be a good idea to > > contact the DEHS maintainer: there might be a way to

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > On 05/11/07 at 16:19 -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote: > > There isn't really any kind of "official" acceptation in Debian. By > asking on -devel@, you basically did everything you could, and if people > complain, you can always say "see, I asked on -devel@, nobody > complaine

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

Hi, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Mon, 05 Nov 2007, Raphael Geissert wrote: >> >> I find SOAP very complex for some queries which could be easily served in >> a format like XML-RPC. > > Huh? > > Unless your favorite language's soap bindings are horrid, SOAP should > be fairly simple and trivial.[1]

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 20:40:44 -0600 Raphael Geissert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Unless your favorite language's soap bindings are horrid, SOAP should > > be fairly simple and trivial.[1] None of the examples in > > http://wiki.debian.org/DebbugsSoapInterface are "very complex", which > > covers

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

[Raphael Geissert] > Is there any objection for not letting my scripts fill bug reports? > Comments? Suggestions? or any other kind of feedback? :) No objection, but I would recommend including a URL to a page explaining with examples how to fill the watch file with working values for at least so

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > [Raphael Geissert] >> Is there any objection for not letting my scripts fill bug reports? >> Comments? Suggestions? or any other kind of feedback? :) > > No objection, but I would recommend including a URL to a page > explaining with examples how to fill the watch file

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi everybody, Yesterday, after fixing some bugs on DEHS (I'm now part of the team), I ran the script that performs all the checks. That means there's new, fresh, information regarding the watch files so I'd like to report the new watch files failing t

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

Quoting Raphael Geissert ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > This time the number of watch files to be reported is 88, reason why I'm > posting to the list. > I hope there won't be any objection and that nobody disagrees on me making > an other, probably mass (depends on the watch files, not me :), bug filling

Re: Mass bugs filing: bogus debian/watch files

Christian Perrier wrote: > > Let's be active: I fully support this initiative and, from this > thread, you made all the required efforts to take care of doing your > "mass" bug report, so I would say in short: go for it! After reviewing some of the reports I added some more keywords to the filter