[Reportbug-maint] Emdebian version strings and the BTS

Neil Williams codehelp at debian.org
Fri Feb 27 09:11:22 UTC 2009

On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 12:43:50 +0530
Y Giridhar Appaji Nag <appaji at debian.org> wrote:

> On 09/02/26 23:17 +0000, Neil Williams said ...
> > Test output:
> > bsdmainutils (6.1.10em1) is an Emdebian package, redirecting to buildd.emdebian.org.
> This sounds as if the bug is being filed at buildd.emdebian.org rather
> than bugs.debian.org, perhaps say "filing a bug against the
> buildd.emdebian.org pseudo-package" or some such?

OK, I was just using a short message for simplicity.

bsdmainutils (6.1.10em1) is an Emdebian package - filing bug against the
buildd.emdebian.org pseudo-package initially, as requested by Emdebian.


Maybe then a comment in reportbug (1) that the bug will be re-assigned
later, if appropriate - or maybe use the novice|expert structure so
that novices get an extra line saying that the bug will be re-assigned
later if appropriate. The reasoning is that Emdebian modifies Debian
packages and therefore the bug might only exist in Emdebian - this
needs to be checked by the Emdebian developers first.

> > email body would have contained:
> > Subject: buildd.emdebian.org: test bug
> Matter of personal choice, but don't you think "buildd.emdebian.org" is
> an overkill in the subject?  Wouldn't just "emdebian" do?

Actually, that is a very good point. Filing a bug against
ftp.debian.org (the closest equivalent pseudo-package) leaves the
pseudo-package out of the subject entirely and has a Package: field in
the bug report. I think that is a better implementation. Thanks for

I think we will need to have support for customised subject templates
along the lines of wnpp and ftp.debian.org, indeed most
pseudo-packages. Emdebian will need support for:

1. Identification (from the user or apt-cache policy) as to whether
this is Emdebian Crush (cross-built) or Emdebian Grip (closer to
Debian). This is a no-op so far because Crush does not yet support
python. :-) (or perl, or java or anything except C really).

2. Support for RM bugs with suite and other features similar to

3. Support for RFP|ITP bugs without the requirement for the current
wnpp body template because the package needs to exist in Debian anyway
before being requested for Emdebian. This would just be a convention in
the subject line.

4. Support for user tags. ;-)

Those would, together, provide a way to reorganise the
buildd.emdebian.org page in the BTS along the lines of ftp.debian.org
and wnpp, making it easier for everyone.

Initially, all this can be left as "conventions-to-be-finalised" for
the subject line itself and only loosely following current practice for
similar packages in Debian. Therefore, I don't want to stipulate
hard-coded support for this into reportbug at this time, just outline
what I will probably be looking to implement in a few months from now.
Can such support be implemented via /usr/share/bug/* ?


Neil Williams

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/reportbug-maint/attachments/20090227/3da3b904/attachment.pgp 

More information about the Reportbug-maint mailing list