Re: Proposal to update NMU section 5.11.1
On Tue, April 24, 2012 08:50, Chris Knadle wrote:
>> > - States that leaving an open grave bug might be better than possibly
>> > uploading a version that breaks something else
>>
>> that's correct
>
> Try to read between the lines -- it implies "be reluctant to do an NMU
> unless you're absolutely sure of what you're doing". That's a much
> higher bar than the spirit that I think is embodied in Zack's email
> describing NMUs.
This seems like valuable advice for any upload, including NMU's, so I
don't think this bar needs to be lowered at all, nor do I think Zack
promotes that.
> And there's a difference between being correct and being informative.
> i.e. just because a statement is correct doesn't mean it conveys what DDs
> need to know.
Is there a concrete problem with DD's misunderstanding this text?
> > - Implies that the NMU package shouldn't make any changes other than
>> some
>> > time of critical bug fix -- quoting: "Fixing cosmetic issues or
>> changing
>> > the packaging style in NMUs is discouraged."
>>
>> You are over-reading.
>
> Saying this is not helpful.
I do think Lucas is right - you are taking a rather large leap of
interpretation: from very specific ("no cosmetic changes or switching
packaging style") to rather generic ("nothing other than critical bugs").
There's a host of issues in between, they are not excluded in the text but
they are excluded in what you say the text 'implies'. I would indeed
suggest, like Lucas, not to try too hard to find 'implications' or
'between the lines' text, which isn't actually there.
Thijs
Reply to: