On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 08:40:49AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 08:53:55PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > The testing scripts have never been about ensuring that woody doesn't have
> > any bugs at all; it's been about ensuring that it doesn't have release
> > critical bugs. Neither 114186 nor 115752 have been marked as RC. I'd've
> > thought 115752 should be at least "serious" ("in the maintainer's opinion
> > makes the package unsuitable for release"), fwiw.
> There are plenty of bugs I don't intend to "release" XFree86 with,
There's a big difference between bugs you don't intend to release with, and
bugs that that make the package unsuitable for release.
A known typo in a manpage (pick my favourite example) is a prime candidate
for the sort of bug no one intends to release with, but that doesn't
make the package unsuitable for release, eg.
> but
> one that requires only a 5-second edit to conffile doesn't strike me as
> "serious" by any stretch of the imagination.
"root::0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash"
How hard it is for users to fix, or for you to fix isn't the question,
remotely.
> If there are people using woody who can't handle firing up a text editor
> to remove a pair of quotes from a 2-line file, they need to go back to
> playing Pong.
That one'd be your basic "ad hominem". The point of "testing" and
"unstable" isn't to separate the men from the boys, it's to prepare a
new stable operating system.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
"Security here. Yes, maam. Yes. Groucho glasses. Yes, we're on it.
C'mon, guys. Somebody gave an aardvark a nose-cut: somebody who
can't deal with deconstructionist humor. Code Blue."
-- Mike Hoye,
see http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/armadillos.txt
Attachment:
pgp3ks_a274Pu.pgp
Description: PGP signature