1 [Excerpts from an email]
3 To: Ali Abdin <ALIABDIN@aucegypt.edu>
4 Subject: Re: Some gnome-bug bugs :)
5 From: Jacob Berkman <jberkman@andrew.cmu.edu>
11 > Wouldn't it be better to load the package listing from a FILE as opposed
12 > to having it in an array of strings?
16 > That makes much more sense as an
17 > 'infrastructure' improvement - a simple file with a .package extension
18 > (i.e. gtkgnome.package mozilla.package freeciv.package etc.) Anyway, it
19 > would basically list all packages in the specific project (basically a
20 > normal text file with a package on each line).
22 So there is more to supporting different BTS's than packages.
23 Fortunately, there are 2 BTS's in use (well that I know of right now):
24 debian (debian, gnome, kde) and bugzilla (mozilla, redhat). So they
25 not only have different packages, but differant formats for submitting
28 It gets a little more complicated when you think about system information
29 (as in, if you are submitting a kde bug report, they don't care which
30 gnome-core you have installed). So, in addition to having the packages
31 list, you need to enable some of this stuff too.
33 So here are the different problems i have identified:
36 --------------------------- -----------------------------------------
37 package listing/other stuff xml stored format, or something
39 required system info gmodule type plugins if necessary, if not
40 it can be stored in the above xml file
42 different UI's some libglade stuff could be done here,
43 which would be really really cool. This
44 almost definitely requires the plugin
47 So this all adds a bit of complexity and stuff. Right now I would just
48 like it to stay pretty simple, but definitely in the future this is