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.
If I were in Christian shoes facing such issue (dormant l10n bug, but the
rebuild triggers a FTBFTS), I would report the FTBFTS, and look at another
package (ie, not doing the NMU if he obviously cannot do it right).
If it's too late already (ie, the FTBFTS is trigered by build daemons on
alpha or other), I will go cry on debian-l10n-french or other to get some
help. I am coordinator of the french l10n, but in the civilian, I work on
massively heterogeneous platforms (yup, da grid). So, I guess I could try to
work around such issues. I know some perl semi-gods in the team. Other
members may be good at libraries puzzles.
As we work heavily in team, we know that the responsability of fixing the
mess we introduce in NMUs is ours. Not only Christian's, but ours. And our
chance is that there is many of us, all wanting to get a better l10n, but
with not only translating abilities (in fact I'm even rather bad at
translating).
Little need to worry about who's responsability it is to fix the mess, it
has to be done, that's all.
Thanks for your time, Mt.
--
Un clavier azerty en vaut deux.
Reply to: