Re: Did some bugzilla cleanups
On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 08:52:22 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Products are:
>
> Fedora (versions: 8, 9, development)
> Fedora EPEL (versions: 5)
We really need to discuss quickly if we want to stick to that scheme. E.g.
1) do we want to seperate free and nonfree in bugzilla?
Would make it possible to assign different owners. Else there's no
benefit.
2) is Fedora EPEL really a good name?
Products in bugzilla can be renamed.
My answers:
1) unsure; most people likely don't care from which of the repos the
package comes from; other people OTOH will (and those might even yell at
us if we don't seperate)
Do they even know? With too many products in bz to choose from they may
get lost in the lists of "components" and give up trying to find a
package name.
Other issues:
* There are entries in owners.list with no bz account.
EPEL: faad2, lame, libdca, twolame, x264, xv, xvidcore
Fedora:
mupen64-ricevideo
sidplay-libs
amarok-extras-freeworld
amule
audacious-plugins-freeworld
compat-plone
compat-python24
compat-python24-elementtree
compat-python24-feedparser
compat-python24-imaging
compat-python24-libxml2
compat-python24-lxml
compat-python24-setuptools
compat-zope
faad2
ffmpeg
iscsitarget
iscsitarget-kmod
KmPg2
lame
libdca
live555
mamory
mp3gain
mpd
mpg321
mplayer
mupen64
qc-usb
qc-usb-kmod
rt2860
rt2860-kmod
twolame
vagalume
x264
xine-lib-extras-freeworld
xvidcore
xv
* There are entries which differ between "free" and "nonfree".
EPEL: libmad
* There is an entry with an "initialqacontact" which is a field
disabled in this bz. Use "initialcc" instead.
EPEL: libmpeg2
* Avoid the '&' character in package summaries in owners.list because
bz doesn't replace it with a html entity. This breaks parsing of bz
pages.