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

Re: Proposal for removal of mICQ package

On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 12:48:03AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Timothy Ball <timball@tux.org> wrote:
>  > Now the brokeness of the mICQ pkg could and *should* have been
>  > found by the maintainer *way* before this ever became an issue. It
>  > should have been worked out by the maintainer and the upstream
>  > author. The sheer fact that it has become an issue shows negligence
>  > of the debian maintainer.
> 	Well, yes and no. No single person can test all code paths
>  in, say, emacs, or all kernel config options, or all parts of
>  Gnus. Test as best you can, release early, release often.
> 	All One can really ask a maintainer is that the auses opckage is
>  installable, and they ran the apckage through a test
>  suite. Exhaustive testing is not something that can be reasonably
>  expected of the maintainers (or even the authors).

Hey I can expect the maintainer to at least try to install his own deb
and run the program. I'm not saying every pkg should be unit tested...
okay maybe I am saying that each pkg should be unit tested, but in the
least can chapter 7. of the DNMG have more than just ten sentences? 


	GPG key available on pgpkeys.mit.edu
pub  1024D/511FBD54 2001-07-23 Timothy Lu Hu Ball <timball@tux.org>
Key fingerprint = B579 29B0 F6C8 C7AA 3840  E053 FE02 BB97 511F BD54

Reply to: