❦ 22 octobre 2016 14:44 +1030, Ron <ron@debian.org> :
> It seems fair to assume that you aren't seriously asking them to
> endorse the idea of chmod 777 as an acceptable interface for
> distro software - but that's what "force the new version into
> the distro one way or another" actually means.
Yes, I am not.
> So are you asking if we should package a version that has htags
> removed instead of what we currently have? Because that's the
> essential implication of "remove the offending CGI bit".
Yes. I have asked first here:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=574947#161
You politely said that you would rather not take this solution.
> Or are you asking if we should somehow fix the incompatibility
> with "many frontends", that nobody has explicitly detailed or
> reported yet. Because that's a possibility too, though arguably
> it's actually a bug in the "many frontends" and/or another fatal
> flaw in the upstream maintenance of this software that it keeps
> breaking compatibility by changing the meaning of existing options
> and renaming them gratuitously.
I am using ggtags (a frontend for Emacs). I tried to quickly show how
many options were added:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=574947#171
Upstream doesn't break backward compatibility gratuitously, they are
adding new options and frontends use them. You proposed to "fix" the
frontend to be compatible with obsolete (upstream's word) versions. Not
something that I can really find useful.
> When all you ask me is "upload global6 or else", there's not much
> I can usefully discuss except to repeat facts I've repeated many
> times before that still haven't changed. If you can acknowledge
> the problems with that, including the ones it would make for other
> people which you don't personally care about, then we can try to
> find some consensus on what a good way forward might be ... and
> point to that the next time someone asks "what needs to be done
> to fix this?". But that's hard to do when people are just tugging
> hard in some direction solely on their own self interest.
>
> I want a good solution to this at least as much as anyone else does,
> but the path of least resistance is what makes a river crooked, so if
> we don't want this to end up as some sort of bug infested billabong
> spreading disease to the people who use it, then we will need some
> better answers than just "blindly package and upload a new upstream
> version" - because the minimal work needed to do just that is not the
> actual problem here.
If you want to keep the CGI stuff, a solution would be to let somebody
else create a global6 package (or yourself, as you prefer) and let this
package break/conflict/replace with global. Use of alternatives could be
a solution but this is quite more difficult as paths are not versioned.
--
Keep it right when you make it faster.
- The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature