incorporate some suggestions/updates into TODO

1 files changed, 46 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/TODO b/TODO
index 24353a6..3230e06 100644
--- a/TODO
+++ b/TODO
@@ -16,6 +16,8 @@ dead code removal/cleanup
   after switching a few design decisions, there's some code that's no longer
   used or should be removed
 
+document url-based api more fully
+
 == medium-range TODO ==
 
 review db design
@@ -39,7 +41,51 @@ decide how much should be cgi-based and how much should be written
   accessing, but the question is whether it should be, or whether certain
   componenets should remain static.
 
+review url-based interface, determine how to make it more flexible hopefully
+not at the cost of ugly url's or exposing the language.
+
 == long-range TODO ==
 
 dynamic info?
 external data sources?
+
+== suggestions from others ==
+
+pabs:
+
+A couple of suggestions for the patch pages:
+
+http://patch-tracking.debian.net/patch/debianonly/view/abraca/0.2-2
+http://patch-tracking.debian.net/patch/series/view/a52dec/0.7.4-11/01-libtoolize
+http://patch-tracking.debian.net/patch/series/view/a52dec/0.7.4-11/03-soname
+
+The diffstat should be in a <pre> tag.
+
+(i think this is already done? -sf)
+
+The diffstat should link to anchors embedded in the diff for each file.
+
+Would be nice to extract the patch description/header; stripping the
+dpatch header, some of the quilt cruft that can happen and whatever else
+you find, then nicely format that and stick it at the top.
+
+With source format 3 (quilt) it might be nice to know the diff between
+the debian/ directory in the orig.tar.gz if any and the debian/
+directory in the debian.tar.gz.
+
+A couple of suggestions for the error page:
+
+http://patch-tracking.debian.net/package/apache/1.3.34-4.1+etch
+
+The code seems to say that apache doesn't exist, but it does, just that
+version doesn't. I think it should say version not found and be a copy
+of the main page for the package.
+
+The error page does not return a HTTP 404 code, so search engines will
+index the error pages, which would be bad. 
+
+General stuff:
+
+Once packages.d.o links to it, this really needs announcing widely; LWN
+at the least, might want to talk about it on the debian-publicity list
+first though.