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>