severity 292401 important stop Hello, The conclusion of discussion with the Release Managers on #debian-release was that this bug is really annoying but not RC. They conceded the (unintentional and in fact hitherto unnoticed) lack of clarity in sarge_rc_policy, but don't feel that this merits enforcing the strictest interpretation given the obvious practical difficulties, and recommend the bug be lowered to important. Cheers, Christopher Martin [12:46] <Thucydides> Could one of the RMs evaluate bug #292401, and advise on the different interpretations of Sarge RC-ness contained therein? [12:47] <aba> Thucydides: if the title is true, it is RC. [12:48] <neuro> no it isn't [12:48] <Kamion> doesn't seem RC to me; very annoying but not RC [12:48] <aba> eh, moment [12:48] <neuro> the rc policy is that the package _maintainer scripts_ don't do that to conffiles [12:48] * aba misunderstood the title [12:48] <aba> neuro: agreed. [12:48] <Kamion> aba: I think you read it as kdm.config, rather than kdm_config? [12:48] * aba goes back to the sick list [12:48] <aba> Kamion: yes. [12:49] <aba> I read it as "$package overwrites conffile", not "$program overwrites conffile" - which is obviously quite a different thing. [12:49] <Kamion> although Bill is right that sarge_rc_policy goes a bit further than that [12:49] <Kamion> which is interesting since I don't think I've noticed that text before [12:50] <aba> well, the question is: What is an editor? I think I might qualify kdm_config as an specialiced editor, but - well, it's really quite annoying. [12:50] <Kamion> hmm. I think the current letter of our release policy is in fact that it's RC, but I would be inclined to leave this one alone for sarge now unless it's easy to fix [12:51] <Kamion> depending, as aba says, on exactly what you call an editor [12:51] <Thucydides> it's not an easy fix, I'm afraid [12:51] <neuro> it's not easy to fix. [12:51] <Kamion> seems unlikely that it would be [12:51] <Kamion> I think we should modify the release policy to replace "an editor" with "a program designed to edit the file" or some such [12:52] <neuro> it might be easy to fix if kde used certain gnome libraries to read the conf file...but I'm sure that fix wouldn't be acceptable to most. [12:52] <aba> I would tend to downgrade it to annyoing^Wimportant. [12:52] <jvw> Kamion: well, the program might be designed to edit the conffile, but it doesn't clearly advertise itself as such -- from an unsuspecting user POV, it modifies some 'registry', rather than a real conffile [12:53] <Kamion> yeah, but that's different from some automated process running it without any user request at all [12:53] <jvw> but yeah, pragmatic thinking yields to make this bug not RC [12:53] <aba> (we might even consider it as "quite annoying", which also important) [12:53] <neuro> jvw: if the user is that unsuspecting, they're not going to be using a text editor on the file, either. [12:54] <neuro> or be answering anything other than "enter" to dpkg prompts [12:58] <Thucydides> Thanks for clarifying. I'll set the bug back to important. [12:59] <Kamion> feel free to quote this conversation
Attachment:
pgpcg1JYMoeCN.pgp
Description: PGP signature