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 t
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 wordi
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", th
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
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 c
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 in
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
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
pgp8kk8GN53tc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
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
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
11 matches
Mail list logo
