On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 09:33 -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Wed, 05 Aug 2009, Carl Worth wrote: > > By avoiding putting the text here we can also ensure that the > > candidate knows how to search deep into Debian's mail archives and > > find the original announcement of the usertag feature. > > You'll find that in most cases it's the rather more pedestrian case of > no one noticing a particular message and/or being too busy.
Yes, I know. I was just trying to send a reminder and wanted to add some light-hearted fluff rather than just the word "ping". I did forget to add a smiley, so I apologize if this came across as anything other than a lame joke. :-} > usertag is a request@ feature, not a control@ feature, so it's kind of > documenting the wrong thing. Ah, good point. I missed that. [Though, as an off-topic aside here, I do find it confusing as a user that various pieces of BTS functionality are split among submit@, control@, and request@ sometimes with different syntax for the same operation (contrast adding a tag to an original submission vs. tagging an existing report). I might well propose some consolidation of the interface to make things easier to use (obviously keeping all existing interfaces functional).] > I personally haven't applied it or fixed it because I missed the mail > with the patch from Martin and hadn't seen it when looking back > through (and it wasn't tagged patch either). Fair enough. Thanks for the explanation. > That said, if you send this bug a patch which: > > 1) creates a new wml webpage which documents usertags and (hopefully!) > starts on documenting user-categories > > 2) adds links from server-request and server-control to the page > > tag the bug patch, and remind me if I forget to apply it within a > week, I'll see that it gets applied and the bug gets closed. Thanks. That's exactly why I asked if there was something I could do here. I'll see if I can get to that task soon. Keep up the good work! -Carl
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
