Re: python-django_1.8.18-1~bpo8+1_amd64.changes REJECTED
* Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> [2017-05-25 11:53:47 CEST]:
> Rhonda, you are turning into circles and not answering my real questions
> here:
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-backports/2017/05/msg00174.html
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-backports/2017/05/msg00112.html
>
> Please answer me. Thank you.
I did. That you don't like the answer doesn't make it less of one.
> The problem described here is that if we have Django reverse dependencies
> in backports (I don't know if we have any), right now they have been
> tested/validated with Django 1.7.x (stable) or 1.8.x (jessie-backports)
> and switching to 1.10.x will likely break some of those packages that
> were relying on deprecated features that got removed in 1.9.x and 1.10.x.
Pardon me, but how would they likely break some of those packages if
they are expected to work in stretch from where they got backported
from? I can't follow. Either they are working in stretch with 1.10, or
not - then they should get fixed in stretch to work with 1.10.
> > If django regularly changes API in such ways it should be considered
> > before backporting, not sticking at an extra version that doesn't relate
> > to what we have in testing.
>
> So, for you, the rules are more important than the service we provide to
> our users. For me, it's the opposite.
No, it isn't. Don't twist my words to fit them your interpretation.
You denied to communicate this in a useful manner, now we have a mess,
and now you want us to fix it in the only way that fits your needs.
Please think before putting burden onto others. If you would have
contacted us right from the start we could have discussed it in a
civilised matter instead of you not taking responsibility for your
intentional inability to communicate with us.
Yes, this sounds very personal, but you got it to this stage, don't
shift that to us. And it is extremely inconvenient to expect us to just
swallow it down like nothing happened, or like you wouldn't do it again
if it happened to be convenient for you.
> > Software that depends on django in backports will be instable if its
> > upgraded to 1.10? If so, that would also mean they are instable in
> > stretch. Please fix that in a soon stable release.
>
> (*shrugh*)
>
> All the Django ecosystem makes effort to work well with LTS versions
> of Django. So providing an LTS version is beneficial and can avoid issues
> with some applications which have not been vetted against non-LTS
> versions.
So you failed to provide an LTS version for stretch knowing that.
That's not our fault. Your lack to communicate in time instead of
having us stumble upon it is neither our fault. What you try now is
make it our fault to fix the mess you got us into instead of taking
responsibility for it and try to make it look like it's a personal
animosity against you.
The animosity is not towards you as a person, it's towards your
intentional action. That action was highly unprofessional and
unacceptable, and it's also unacceptable to expect us to just swallow
it down as if nothing happened.
> > And Raphael - if you would have contacted us beforehand instead of
> > intentionally do not this could all have been avoided and a useful
> > discussion could have been had. Don't turn this around that the mess
> > that we are in now is our fault because you did choose not to
> > communicate.
>
> I'm sorry, but I fail to see how it would have been different. I would
> have been in front of the same wall, you would not understand why I want
> to maintain the LTS version in jessie-backports and my use case would not
> be important enough for you to bend your policy.
So you intentionally chose to break the rules. Are you aware that you
are digging your hole deeper with that? I appreciate your honesty,
which must not be easy, but not communicating when you know you are
breaking or twisting the rules is a definite no-go. Under no
circumstances can I accept that. It *would* have been different because
the mess that we are in now could have been avoided, *for our users*.
We can't turn back the time, but we could have come to an agreement how
to deal with this. Now you insist of having your way as the only
possible way. Sorry, I don't play that game.
> I am not a 2-year old kid that will learn a lesson because you
> kick me with a stick on the fingers. I would have hoped that you
> could explain what is "messy" in this situation.
If you can't see that then I'm very sorry, multiple different people
tried to explain it to you.
Whatever,
Rhonda
--
Fühlst du dich mutlos, fass endlich Mut, los |
Fühlst du dich hilflos, geh raus und hilf, los | Wir sind Helden
Fühlst du dich machtlos, geh raus und mach, los | 23.55: Alles auf Anfang
Fühlst du dich haltlos, such Halt und lass los |
Reply to: