On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 15:53:06 -0400 Andrew SB wrote:
>On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Sense Hofstede wrote:
>> Reporting bugs against every package would indeed result in a lot of new bug
>> reports, but I do think that it would be a good way of keeping track of
>> the implementation process. We
Benjamin Drung [2009-09-20 21:59 +0200]:
> Start with packages with >= 50 bugs open.
>
> Look at audacity, eclipse, vlc, to name a view.
I'd think that it makes more sense to start with packages which are
actually maintained in Ubuntu, i. e. where someone actually looks at
bugs.
Also, apport hoo
Am Sonntag, den 20.09.2009, 15:53 -0400 schrieb Andrew SB:
> As someone who would be willing to write hooks and incorporate
> them into a package, looking at a bug list of over 16,000 wouldn't
> give me any idea where to start.
Start with packages with >= 50 bugs open.
Look at audacity, eclipse,
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Sense Hofstede wrote:
> Reporting bugs against every package would indeed result in a lot of new bug
> reports, but I do think that it would be a good way of keeping track of
> the implementation process. We could use python-launchpadbugs to make the
> task easier.
2009/9/20 Andrew SB
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Sense Hofstede wrote:
> > What should this operation do? The idea is to create an 'apport-hook'
> tag,
> > report bugs against all packages (that don't have a hook yet) and start
> > watching the bugs. Then we can write hooks and watch the
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Sense Hofstede wrote:
> What should this operation do? The idea is to create an 'apport-hook' tag,
> report bugs against all packages (that don't have a hook yet) and start
> watching the bugs. Then we can write hooks and watch the tag for bugs that
> have a prope
