On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 10:49:47AM -0500, Matt Zimmerman scribbled: > 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. How many times do I have to repeat the mantra? Newly added code that's trivial to test (the case of postgresql.env) MUST be tested and it was not tested. It was lying untested for 9 months. > > 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. ok, I give up. It's like banging with my head against the wall. > > 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. Sure, whatever you say. > > > 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 that's the keyword! _Trivial_ - haven't you noticed that yet that I was calling for testing _trivial_ cases? Maybe now you will get the point of my mail - I call for testing trivial cases, conducting trivial tests so that trivial bugs don't make it into unstable. Do you understand that now? > 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. Yes sir, I'm on my way. marek
Attachment:
pgpv3CMvo8Xdm.pgp
Description: PGP signature