Bug#1028530: https://www.debian.org/Bugs/ says tag 'forky' exists, bugs.debian.org says it does not
Paul Gevers <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.debian.devel.www |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <60c98b19-bf67-775b-4555-854f407d6faf__12521.2713539199$1675193252$gmane$org@debian.org> |
Control: retitle -1 www.debian.org/Bugs should get tags from BTS Hi, On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 12:13:41 +0000 Simon McVittie <[email protected]> wrote: > To reproduce: > - look at the list of valid tags in https://www.debian.org/Bugs/ > - see that trixie, trixie-ignore, forky and forky-ignore are in the list > - try to tag a bug "+ trixie forky" (I tried to do this in #885563) > > Expected result: either tagging a bug + forky succeeds, or the list of > valid tags does not include forky until it becomes relevant. > > Actual result: https://www.debian.org/Bugs/ lists forky and forky-ignore, > but when I tried to use the forky tag, the BTS replied: This is now fixed; I filed bug 1029978 without noticing this bug. 1029978 got promptly fixed: thanks. > Ideally the web page would receive the list of valid tags from the BTS > instead of having its own idea of what is valid. I think this remains true. I this case I pinged on IRC for an update of the tags and then continued to update the documents. In hindsight that wasn't too smart. Paul
OpenPGP_signature
(application/pgp-signature, 495 B) - not displayed