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

Re: NMUs applying sleeping wishlist bugs about translation (was something else)

On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 07:28:03PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 10:26:32AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Let's say i do translataion work, for that i have to build the package,
> > and notice that it FTBFS (at least on some obscure arch or something). I
> > then fill a FTBFS bug report, thus liberating me of the responsability
> > you want to trust on me, and then NMU the translation improved package.
> Uh, no. If it liberates you of anything, it'll likely be your ability to
> do any more NMUs.
> If the package is less useful to people after you do the NMU than before
> you started looking at it, that's a problem. If it was formerly able
> to be run by everyone no matter which architecture, and now no longer
> works on alpha, that's a problem.

And you don't care that it FTBFS ? If it FTBFS, then the package is
broken, and knowing this is better than not knowing this. and how in
hell can this be the responsability of the NMUer, if it FTBFS even
before he touched the package.

I agree if the FTBFS comes from something the NMUer did, then yes, it is
broken, but if it comes from general bad shape of the packages, then the
responsability is to the package maintainer, and failing that (if he is
MIA or otherwise unresponsive) the responsability of the QA team or the
debian devels in general, not particularly the translators.


Sven Luther

Reply to: