Re: Work-needing packages report for Sep 6, 2002
On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 07:31:41PM +0000, Martin Wheeler wrote:
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Michael Stone wrote:
Well, you've missed the distiction between "cohesive, quality
distibution" and "collection of random crap".
Not true.
No, perfectly true. What he said is that nobody is forcing anyone to
take care of packages. That's true in a sense, but debian (IMHO) aims to
deliver a total high-quality package. Users shouldn't have to wonder
whether a package they install from the stable distribution is
well-maintained.
There is no one-to-one correlation between 'maintained' and 'quality'; just as
there is no one-to-one correlation between 'unmaintained' and either 'random',
or 'crap'.
You're the one bringing up those correlations. The correlation I pointed
out is debian=="cohesive quality distribution". That implies that
someone must look after every package. If a problem is discovered with a
package it must be addressed. Yanking the package is an acceptable
approach for unstable, but doesn't work as well for stable.
Random crap is what you get when nobody takes responsibility for the
overall quality of the distribution--which was the implication of the
mail to which I responded.
Please do not confuse personal opinion and bigotry with logical relationships.
Likewise.
Mike stone
Reply to: