Re: 88 Priority violations in woody
On Tue, Apr 30, 2002 at 08:26:41AM -0400, Thomas Hood wrote:
> guess the problem was that I didn't see how one could object to
> someone reporting clear policy violations, especially in light of
A large part of the reason why these things are supposed to be discussed
prior to being filed is that there's a fairly good chance that if a
problem exists in a large number of packages and hasn't yet generated
lots of complaints and bug reports the problem might not really be in
the packages. In the case of policy violations it may well be that
policy doesn't accurately reflect what we want to do.
> No one denies that these are bugs. Given the number of bugs,
> though, I did expect that the RM would choose to ignore them.
Immediately before release? It's not exactly making life any easier, is
it?
> All this makes me wonder how many other bugs have been swept under
> the rug in order to get woody out by a deadline.
You're filing release critical bugs for something which is, at the end
of the day, not actually worth holding up the release for - they aren't
actually going to break much of anything.
People are getting narked because you're mass filing bugs without
following the required procedure, creating pointless release critical
bugs a day or so before the release is due. Had you either more
obviously thought about what you were doing or bothered to consult with
people before mass filing bugs things might be different.
--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: