Hi Bastian, Thanks for your reply. I understand how it works now. I didn't realize RNG checked to see what versions it was fixed and unfixed in.
Going off the deep end a bit, I could imagine RNG using some of apt-listbugs' found/fixed functionality and showing some kind of hybrid status to indicate whether it was fixed in the version that's the candidate for installation on the local machine, or in a version that's in a different repo...but all that might be a bit complicated, especially for end-users. Maybe RNG could do something simple like add an asterisk next to the status field if the bug fix is pending in a later version, or give it a slightly different color. As it is now, the only way to know that it's been addressed is to click on it and read the bug's web page. Thanks for this great app! I was hoping something like RNG would come out of the 2006 SoC, but it was worth the wait. :) Adam On Monday 02 April 2007 02:13, Bastian Venthur wrote: > Hi Adam, > > thanks for all your bugreports, I really appreciate your help and > suggestions. But this time I think you're wrong. RNG *always* shows the > latest info from > > bugs.debian.org/reportbug-ng > > It always gets the html from this URL and parses it. Please have a look > at the first lines of this site: > > Debian Bug report logs: package reportbug-ng in unstable (versions > 0.2007.03.24, 0.2007.03.29) > > This means for some archs, 0.2007.03.24 is still the current version in > unstable and in this version #416132 was not yet fixed. > > There is a difference when you look at the bugs at RNG's *source* package > > bugs.debian.org/src:reportbug-ng > > where #416132 is of course closed. > > In contrast to reportbug, I'm not showing the status of he source > package on purpose since some packages like kdelibs have thousands of > bugs, while shiping many binary packages like kate which has only a few > dozens of bugs. If I'd show all the bugs from kdelibs if someone queries > for kate, the user would be overwhelmed by thousands of unrelated > bugreports. > > If you agree, I'll close your bugreport. Feel free to reopen it if you > don't agree with me. > > > Cheers, > > Bastian > > Adam Porter schrieb: > > Looking at the bugs for r-ng, it shows #416132 as "Outstanding," but > > going to the b.d.o page for r-ng in Konqueror shows that same bug as > > "Resolved."
pgpLbaytqbXF2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
