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

Re: Bug#172677: postgresql-client: The package won't install (again)

On Wed, 2002-12-11 at 23:31, Marek Habersack wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 10:53:53PM +0000, Oliver Elphick scribbled:
> > > I would really appreciate if you tested your packages before uploading them.
> > 
> > It would take days to test all possible paths properly.  I don't have
> > time, and I don't have any volunteers lining up to help either.  I check
> > that it installs for me.  As for other possibilities - that's what
> > unstable is for.  Sorry.
> No, ustable is not for breaking people's work machines, sorry. If you aren't
> sure of your package, upload it to experimental, please. If you want to

experimental just doesn't get enough exposure.  I'm aware of only one
person who downloaded the initial packages that I put there.

> upload to unstable, you are taking responsibility for the systems of
> hundreds of developers out there and if you fail to test trivial cases like
> the one above, you are abusing their confidence. This is not a good thing

If you are running your work machine on unstable, you are taking a lot
of risks; too many by the sound of it. 
http://www.debian.org/distrib/packages says:
        Packages in unstable are the least tested and may contain
        problems severe enough to affect the stability of your system.
        Only experienced users should consider using this distribution.

To put it another way, if it breaks, you get to keep all the pieces.  

You can confidently expect to have serious problems once or twice a year
if you track unstable.  That's why we have unstable: so that less
competent users aren't exposed to those problems.  You seem to want the
quality of stable out of unstable, which is not reasonable.  Debian's
collaborative effort includes package testing; that is what unstable and
testing are for.  Thank you for participating, however unwillingly.

> and 'unstable' doesn't mean 'broken'. Last version of postgresql-dev had a
> broken .postrm script - if you remove a file which you aren't sure whether
> it exists or not, it is nice to do

Packaging changes have consequences, some unforeseen.  That was a
hangover from an old version of the package, which became invalid
following upstream changes and extensive repackaging.  If I were
perfect, I would have noticed before other people told me; but on my
system it didn't happen, so I didn't notice.

[Copying this to debian-devel, rather than the bugs database; since
others may wish to comment.]

Oliver Elphick                                Oliver.Elphick@lfix.co.uk
Isle of Wight, UK                             http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
GPG: 1024D/3E1D0C1C: CA12 09E0 E8D5 8870 5839  932A 614D 4C34 3E1D 0C1C
     "Be of good courage, and he shall strengthen your 
      heart, all ye that hope in the LORD."             
                                  Psalms 31:24 

Reply to: