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>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
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
home |
help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?34el343yr3.l34>