ubuntu-bugcontrol team mailing list archive

[Scott Kitterman <ubuntu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 15:53:06 -0400 Andrew SB <a.starr.b@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Sense Hofstede <sense@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Reporting bugs against every package would indeed result in a lot of new bug
>> reports, but I do think that it would be a good way of keeping track of
>> the implementation process. We could use python-launchpadbugs to make the
>> task easier.
>
>By my count there are only about 44 packages that currently have apport-hooks.
>
>AFAICT, here is the total number of source packages in Karmic:
>
>Number of source packages in karmic:
>  main: 3229
>  restricted: 7
>  universe: 12403
>  multiverse: 520
>
>Totaling 16,159 source packages. Opening new bugs on nearly all of
>them seems to be too broad to be helpful. While I think what you're
>after is a great goal, I think we better reach it by narrowing our
>scope and focusing on specific packages where the hooks will be most
>useful. As someone who would be willing to write hooks and incorporate
>them into a package, looking at a bug list of over 16,000 wouldn't
>give me any idea where to start.
>
Additionally, most of these packages we get from Debian without change.  I think it's reasonably safe to say we do not have the developer resources to shift from merging hundreds of packages every release cycle to merging thousands every cycle.

Finally, unless there is some policy to require apport hooks, the absence of one is not a true bug (these should be file wishlist if at all).

Scott K