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

Re: Bug#218399: PageUp behaviour within less broken AGAIN

On Fri, 2003-10-31 at 07:34, Christian Marillat wrote:

> Scott James Remnant <scott@netsplit.com> writes:
> > Package: libvte4
> > Version: 1:0.11.10-1
> > Severity: important
> important ?
"a bug which has a major effect on the usability of a package, without
rendering it completely unusable to everyone."

I'd say a 15-30s wait on PageUp in less is a "major effect on the
usability" of the package, whilst at the same time not "rendering it
completely unusable to everyone."

I see you've taken the time to change the severity of this bug, I expect
you're therefore rolling the fixed version as I type and it'll be
incoming soon?

I understand if you're too busy to do that right now, after all you DO
maintain a LOT of packages, and your time is perhaps better spent
deflecting users attempts to submit bugs and quibbling over their

I'd be more than happy to upload an NMU for you, got one signed and
ready right here.

> > Tags: patch
> >
> > Hello, this is the one-line patch you may remember from other great
> > Debian bug reports such as #190651 and #203049.  You may even remember
> > applying it in vte (1:0.10.29-3) and silencing the hoards of those
> > strange people who expect 'less' and their terminal to be friends.
> And as long you don't submit this patch to upstream this patch will be
> lost between version...
Ah, how the mists of time gently blow away the ghosts of memory.  This
patch *HAS* been submitted upstream, by me, many months ago.


I'm curious as to why this patch is being lost between versions, after
all you use dpatch to maintain patches against your packages.  Perhaps
you failed to adequately check the build, and this was merely an
oversight?  I certainly hope you don't consider each new 'point release'
a fresh start as far as bugs are concerned, not without reopening them
when you upload, anyway.

I'm also slightly concerned by your attitude that it should be "me" (the
user) who submits this upstream, after all it's your responsibility as
the package maintainer to do that.

Don't believe me?  Well, it's right here in the Social Contract which
you'll find in /usr/share/doc/debian/social-contract.txt on your
machine.  I'm sure you've read it before, but let's look again at #2:

  2. We Will Give Back to the Free Software Community
     When we write new components of the Debian system, we will license
     them as free software. We will make the best system we can, so that
     free software will be widely distributed and used. We will feed
     back bug-fixes, improvements, user requests, etc. to the "upstream"
     authors of software included in our system.

This outlines some of the core responsibilities of the maintainer of a
Debian package; namely that *you* shall "feed back bug-fixes,
improvements, user requests, etc. to the "upstream" authors".

That's right, you've got to deal with those annoying bug reports. 
Tiresome, isn't it, but hey, that's life!

I realise that English may not be your best language (as it isn't your
native one) so you may have not understood it in its original form. 
Here's that same clause translated into your native French:

  2. Nous donnerons en retour à la communauté des logiciels libres

     Lorsque nous écrirons de nouveaux composants du système Debian,
     nous les licencierons sous forme de logiciels libres. Nous ferons
     le meilleur système possible, afin que les logiciels libres soient
     largement distribués et utilisés. Nous signalerons les corrections
     de bogues, les améliorations, les requêtes des utilisateurs, etc.
     aux auteurs des logiciels inclus dans notre système.

Hopefully that's cleared that up, and you'll respond better in future.

Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen?  Are you going round the twist?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: