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

Re: Thwarting Policy via BTS

Le 1999-11-04, John Goerzen écrivait :


> later you uploaded a NMU, without ever giving me a chance to confirm
> that the problem existed, that your suggested fix is solves the
> problem, and that said fix does not cause bugs elsewhere.  You also

You can rest assured that I had confirmed the existence of the problem
before even posting the bug to the BTS. After applying the proposed
fix to my local package, I did some testing, and also checked the upstream
archive, which has had the very same fix for the very same bug for
two weeks.

> did not do much testing as I do for each release, as the program build
> and upload plus requisite testing to make sure it works could not
> possibly have been done in 24 minutes.

This is not the way I proceeded. I do not usually post a bug to the
BTS unless I have done at least some assessment of the bug. In this
case, I went through all the process of finding out the cause of the
problem, devising a solution and testing it before submitting the
bug to the BTS (which is the reason why the report came with a working
patch). As you rightfully observe, this process has taken far more than
24 minutes.

> Furthermore, this bug was not by any stretch of the imagination grave.

I am afraid I have to disagree here. I consider that a mailing list
management system where one cannot administer a list is unuseable or
mostly so. Several mailing lists are hosted at my site where email
is the only medium people use for list administration. Most list
administrators here are not even allowed to log in to the machine
that runs listar.

In this situation, which I suppose is common, being unable to administer
mailing lists through email with the 'admin' command therefore makes
the package 'unuseable or mostly so'.

I am sorry if you consider this NMU as inappropriate. I hope this
mail will address at least part of your concerns.

Thank you for writing,


Reply to: