Re: Is Sid for broken stuff? Is it too much to ask for testing the packages?
On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 06:36:17PM +0100, Marek Habersack wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 10:49:47AM -0500, Matt Zimmerman scribbled:
> > 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.
No. That is a corner case, and it is not necessary for the maintainer to
delete postgresql.env and repeat all of his tests. You tested it, you found
a bug, you reported it, it got fixed. Thanks for participating.
> > 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?
The bug was trivial to fix. The effort required to report the bug was
trivial. The effort for _you_ to find the bug was trivial. The effort for
the maintainer to test a whole range of upgrade scenarios, rather than just
what he uses himself, is not trivial.