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

Re: Uninstallable packages in woody



I'M NOT MEMER OF YOUR MAILING LISTS. MY MAIL IS : PONIK@POBOX.SK
(PONIK@PROVER.SK IS ONLY FORWARD FROM PONIK@POBOX.SK).

WHY THIS MAILS COME TO ME?
EVERY DAY COME TO ME 200 MAILS FROM YOUR MAILING LISTS.

CAN YOU DO SOMETHING WITH IT?

     THANK YOU.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Hartman" <hartmans@debian.org>
To: <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: Uninstallable packages in woody


> >>>>> "Anthony" == Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
>
>     Anthony> On Sun, Jun 02, 2002 at 12:56:33PM -0700, Thomas
>     Anthony> Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>     >> Michael Beattie <mjb@debian.org> writes: > Go and try to work
>     >> out what can and cannot be moved. go and take a look > at the
>     >> incredible complexity of inter-dependencies in packages. you'll
>     >> > quickly work out that what you propose is actually not that
>     >> easy. hence > why I usually take a while to pluck up the
>     >> courage and actually attempt > to fix these things. it is a
>     >> HUGE drain on time.  I sent bug reports, saying "this conflicts
>     >> with that, one or both should be moved to extra"
>
>     Anthony> I'm not sure why you'd think a morass of bug reports is
>     Anthony> less of a time drain. Talk to Michael first, and work out
>     Anthony> a way of helping which actually *helps*, don't just do
>     Anthony> whatever you think's fun and then complain.
>
> As a package maintainer, I'd actually appreciate bug reports on my
> packages filed say after the release or some other time when changing
> priorities is not going to be annoying.  I'd especially appreciate
> bugs that have useful suggestions on how to remove conflicts or on
> which package should become extra.  I probably wouldn't really
> appreciate such bugs being RC, even though it is a policy violation;
> in most cases I'd tolerate it but not exactly be happy.  I'd certainly
> reserve the right to downgrade if it were a complex situation that I
> couldn't resolve.
>
> Why does this save time?  Because I'm doing the work not ftpmaster.  There
are a lot more of us individual developers than their are ftpmasters.  I
> might need to go talk to other package maintainers, but hey I can do
> that.  I've generally found that when I talk to another package
> maintainer and ask them to change a priority with a clearly reasoned
> argument they haven't expressed annoyance to me in the past.
>
> Yeah, ftpmaster still needs to get involved when I eventually upload a
> package that doesn't match the override file.  I suspect it is easier
> to deal with mail clearly outlining why an override change is a good
> idea than to walk through the dependencies themselves.
>
> In theory I could go check the unmet-foo list and not need the bugs
> filed, so I can see an argument that the bugs are a waste of time that
> way too.  Honestly though, Debian makes it easy to close bugs; I'll
> eventually have to upload a new package regardless of whether
> ftpmaster or I changes the priority first and closing the bug in that
> upload seems reasonable.
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
listmaster@lists.debian.org
>


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org



Reply to: