Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      12 May 2003 09:39:44 -0700
From:      swear@attbi.com (Gary W. Swearingen)
To:        Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org>
Cc:        doc@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: docs/52041: testing new mdoc-bug class
Message-ID:  <34el343yr3.l34@localhost.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: <20030511221240.GA37386@gothmog.gr>
References:  <200305110053.h4B0rGd9004467@gothmog.gr> <20030511010700.GA4585@gothmog.gr> <20030511021605.GB8548@gothmog.gr> <20030511024527.GA9150@gothmog.gr> <20030510203753.H665@znfgre.qbhto.arg> <shissh42gx.ssh@localhost.localdomain> <20030511221240.GA37386@gothmog.gr>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org> writes:

> Argh!  I hadn't noticed this class.  This makes it silly to make a class
> for doc-src bugs, since then we'd have change-request PRs for both SGML
> and manpages.

We already had that -- the "change-request" class overlaps with all of
the other classes including the old "doc-bug" one.  Splitting "doc-bug"
doesn't add to the silliness.

It seems that the "class" is dividing in two ways: "bugs vs. non-bugs"
and "base code vs. (src & doc) docs vs. ports".  Ideally, you'd have two
fields for this.

To keep the current fields (but with new elements), I'd probably just
remove the bug/change information from "class" (and maybe add a new
"change-request" (or "NA") element to the "severity" field).

But the easiest fix is probably to have classes something like this:

    base-sw-bug,         base-sw-change,
    base-doc-bug,        base-doc-change,
    fdp-doc-bug,         fdp-doc-change,
    port-user-bug,       port-user-change,
    port-maintainer-bug, port-maintainer-change



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?34el343yr3.l34>