Dustin Kirkland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Bug #208010 suggests LSB-compliance of all init scripts in Debian [6]. > And Bug #291148 suggests a debian-policy change requiring 'status' > actions for all init scripts [7].
Just to say explicitly, these aren't reasons for mass-filing bugs. These are unadopted Policy proposals and hence have no authority or weight. However, if your goal is to unblock those proposals, getting the archive to convert over is the best next step. Then the Policy proposal can go through without making lots of packages instantly buggy. > In Ubuntu, we have undertaken an effort to patch as many such init > scripts as possible [8]. In most of these cases, we would like to > contribute this functionality back to the Debian package. I believe > this flow of bugs and patches would qualify as a 'mass bug filing' [9]. > So far, we filed a few bugs before it was suggested that we propose this > on the debian-devel mailing list: > * 492126, 492131, 492138, 492541, 492625 > > Is it ok to continue filing these requests as wishlist bugs, or is > another approach preferred? I think it's reasonable to file a wishlist bug with a patch to every package that you've modified in this fashion since you're also providing tested custom patches for each package. Mass-filing bugs *without* patches, though, I don't think is a good approach, since you'd be filing bugs against nearly every package with an init script in Debian. A better first approach is to add a Lintian check for missing status support if there's a general consensus that adding status support is a good idea. (Personally, I'm all in favor of it; it will allow Debian to support configuration management systems such as Puppet more effectively.) I think the combination of a Lintian check plus filing wishlist bugs with patches for each init script where you've tested the modifications is a good combination. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
