FS#11604 - {archweb} Package Colours - better visual information

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Jud (judfilm) - Sunday, 28 September 2008, 01:55 GMT
Last edited by Dan McGee (toofishes) - Monday, 01 September 2014, 20:38 GMT
Task Type Feature Request
Category Web Sites
Status Closed
Assigned To Dan McGee (toofishes)
Thayer Williams (thayer)
Architecture All
Severity Very Low
Priority Low
Reported Version None
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 2
Private No

Details

Following on from this feature request:
 FS#11310  - More information about Flagged Packages

I had an idea to improve the information provided to the user and indicate a clearer picture of the status of a Package via the website.

Package Colours - 6 Major states of a Package
-----------------------------------------------
Black - latest version, all ok

Blue - latest version, bug report(s) outstanding

Red - out-of-date

Yellow - out-of-date, new package in Testing

Orange - out-of-date, new package in Testing, bug report(s) outstanding

Purple/Magenta - out-of-date, bug report(s) outstanding



I'm not picky about the colours as long as it seems logical.
This task depends upon

Closed by  Dan McGee (toofishes)
Monday, 01 September 2014, 20:38 GMT
Reason for closing:  Won't implement
Additional comments about closing:  Time to close some old bugs that have had no work done on them, sorry.
Comment by Gavin Bisesi (Daenyth) - Sunday, 28 September 2008, 03:12 GMT
I think it has been discussed elsewhere (can't recall where), but how do we link flyspray and the package database on the website?
Comment by Roman Kyrylych (Romashka) - Sunday, 05 October 2008, 11:17 GMT
I don't think linking package db to flyspray can be done reliably (without silly results due to extra search results, or no results at all for some packages)
Comment by majiq (majiq) - Saturday, 01 August 2009, 22:56 GMT
If flyspray could somehow be tagged (probably by intervention from the assigned dev) to indicate the relevant package(s), then I shouldn't see why this would be possible. I think (never managed a package nor really worked with bugs) that the first issue for devs is to figure out which package needs to be worked on first, so it seems like not asking too much. This could also make searching for bugs on certain packages a bit more standardized.

This (and the other two older website related bugs still open: #11311 and #113112) seem pretty low on the priority list. I can try to lend a hand. I have some php experience and I can handle python. I've picked up a little perl as needed.

Loading...