Bug#876701: needs a toggle

[Adam Borowski]

I wrote:
> Here's a patch that implements "~/.boring-bugs".  If such a file exists,
> all lines starting with a bug number make rc-alert and tools that use it
> filter out those bugs.

Unlike the RFC patch I submitted, it turns out that there's an override
needed -- sometimes you want to know "which packages not within my skillset
are at the risk of not getting to the next release?".  Also, I see that it's
not rare for a bug to rot despite having "Flags:   [ +      ] (patch)" --
while I don't know Python or Java enough to write a fix myself, these
languages are readable enough to assess a patch written by a non-DD
contributor.

Adding such an option is no rocket surgery, but it's up to you to decide
1. what the default should be (my guess: obey .boring-bugs by default),
2. how to name it.


Guillem Jover wrote:
> Could this file be namespaced under some devscripts directory, ideally
> under the XDG hierarchy?

What would you prefer?


ᛗᛖᛟᚹ!
-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ The bill with 3 years prison for mentioning Polish concentration
⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ camps is back.  What about KL Warschau (operating until 1956)?
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Zgoda?  Łambinowice?  Most ex-German KLs?  If those were "soviet
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ puppets", Bereza Kartuska?  Sikorski's camps in UK (thanks Brits!)?