Re: Proposal for removal of mICQ package
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 12:48:03AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Timothy Ball <timball@tux.org> wrote:
> > Now the brokeness of the mICQ pkg could and *should* have been
> > found by the maintainer *way* before this ever became an issue. It
> > should have been worked out by the maintainer and the upstream
> > author. The sheer fact that it has become an issue shows negligence
> > of the debian maintainer.
>
> Well, yes and no. No single person can test all code paths
> in, say, emacs, or all kernel config options, or all parts of
> Gnus. Test as best you can, release early, release often.
>
> All One can really ask a maintainer is that the auses opckage is
> installable, and they ran the apckage through a test
> suite. Exhaustive testing is not something that can be reasonably
> expected of the maintainers (or even the authors).
>
Hey I can expect the maintainer to at least try to install his own deb
and run the program. I'm not saying every pkg should be unit tested...
okay maybe I am saying that each pkg should be unit tested, but in the
least can chapter 7. of the DNMG have more than just ten sentences?
--timball
--
GPG key available on pgpkeys.mit.edu
pub 1024D/511FBD54 2001-07-23 Timothy Lu Hu Ball <timball@tux.org>
Key fingerprint = B579 29B0 F6C8 C7AA 3840 E053 FE02 BB97 511F BD54
Reply to: