[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

On uploads and responsibilities

Dear all,

A few things happened lately which made me wonder.

Looking at bootstrap-base, there's this commit:

which totally broke d-i, which got uploaded on 2016-11-13, and there's
still no released fix for it one whole week after that.

I'm not thrilled about this kind of “push and forget” (git) or “upload
and forget” (in the archive). We need to do better.

(About this specific issue I've just checked with Philip Hands, who
seems to be happy with testing etc., so an upload is forthcoming, but I
wanted not to miss the opportunity to point out this kind of issues.)

Looking at debootstrap, there's this commit:

which was announced (alright, on IRC, but still) as being stashed here
just in case; but dpkg patches were sent right after that, making the
need for this revert moot. Yet, it got uploaded a few days after.

It's not really ideal to revert defaults, because it generates confusion
for users, and makes support unnecessary hard. (How many people are
reporting issues with dailies, or weeklies… are they speaking about d-i
dailies, cdimage dailies, cdimage weeklies anyway?)

Christian, I'm very happy with your uploading l10n only changes so that
translation updates don't take too long before reaching the archive. But
when code changes are involved, maybe it would be better to poke people
having pushed code so that they take responsibility for their changes,
and so that you don't get to be pointed at when wondering who broke

I'll happily take comments and suggestions to improve our workflow (or
maybe lack thereof).

Thanks for your time.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: