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

Re: Is Sid for broken stuff? Is it too much to ask for testing the packages?

On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 02:11:56PM +0100, Marek Habersack wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 12:10:05AM -0500, Matt Zimmerman scribbled:
> > Yes, this is exactly the sort of problem that should be found in
> > unstable.  The maintainer obviously tested that the package installed
> > correctly for
> It is not. See the other mails, I don't want to repeat the arguments
> again.  The code responsible for the bug was never tested by the
> maintainer - a trivial test was needed.

The maintainer explicitly said that it installed for him.  The bug was
clearly not in the common code path; it looks to me like it would only
execute that line if /etc/postgresql/postgresql.env were deleted.

So please stop misrepresenting the bug.

> Oh, come on! I'm tired of that argument, really. I'm not as dumb as I
> might've seen from my mail - I _do_ realize that unstable can have bugs,
> trust me. But I also expect the packaging scripts in the .deb to be tested
> in a basic way. Nah, I won't be repeating the arguments again - I would be
> too obnoxious I think :)

It looks to me like they were tested in a basic way by the maintainer, and
that you ran into a bug that the maintainer didn't.  This is how packages
get tested.

> First of all, note that I am also a maintainer of several packages, so I
> suppose I don't fall in the "someone" category. Second of all, the bugs I
> mentioned should _never_ happen, even in experimental. They require
> trivial, really trivial and obvious tests. If what you're saing is that
> people can fire and forget their packages without testing, then I dread
> for the Debian's future.

More FUD.

> > I think you have acted disrespectfully in handling this bug, and more so
> > by trying to stir up more conflict on debian-devel.
> I am not trying to stir anything. I have made notes about possible
> inflammatory comments and I have made it clear that flame is not my
> intention. Other posters seem to have noticed that, you seem to have
> missed not only the whole point of the mail but also those notes I
> mentioned.

You took a truly trivial problem with a maintainer script and used it to
start a prolonged rant on a public list.  Meanwhile, the bug that you
complained about has been fixed, and you could get on with your own work.

 - mdz

Reply to: