On Tue, 2011-10-25 at 16:10 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 14:59:51 -0700 > Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, 2011-10-25 at 17:18 -0400, Luke Macken wrote: > > > bodhi v0.8.3 > > > ============ > > > > > > Yesterday I pushed out a new bugfix release of bodhi into > > > production. The bodhi-client is currently on it's way to > > > updates-testing for all releases. > > > > > Server fixes > > > ------------ > > > > > > - Default to update ID-based URLs > > > https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/632 > > > > In case you hadn't noticed, response to this has so far been pretty > > negative. It seems people liked being able to tell from the URL what > > the update actually *was*. I must admit I do to. I've resorted to > > creating the 'old-style' URLs manually when I do lists of updates on > > test@ or in trac, now. > > Please read down... > > > Masher fixes > > ------------ > > > > - Updates-testing report emails should use package names not update > > number https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/644 > > But see the test list... there's an issue with the new package name > based links. ;) It's not just the updates-testing list, though. When I go to the web interface, search for updates to, say, grub2, get a list, and click on one of the results, I get an ID-based URL, not a package name-based one. I then paste that into an email, IRC conversation, or trac compose request ticket, and no-one can see what the update *is* unless they click on the link. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
