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

Re: Debian needs more buildds. It has offers. They aren't being accepted.

Matthias Urlichs <smurf@smurf.noris.de> writes:

> Hi, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> > A quick yes/no/wait e-mail is quick, but is often not what's needed when you're
> > talking about issues like buildds.  A deep analysis of a situation takes quite
> > a bit longer.
> > 
> Assuming that such analysis has taken place.

And it should not take long to see if a deep analysis is required. If
it takes too long it is. Just saying that one will look into will tell
the asking person that something will be done and that he (or she)
should wait for more.

If you don't like the question an answere of "work around it" is also
a big time saver. Far better then anoying people by ignoring them.

> I don't know about you, but if I, as a volunteer, am responsible for X,
> and somebody comes up with "I've noticed problem Y with X and would like
> to help by doing Z", the absolutely _worst_ thing I can do in that
> situation is to do nothing at all.
> That's equivalent to doing a however-deep-you'd-like analysis on the topic
> and then not telling anybody, much less Y, about your conclusion.
> That attitude causes more work for everybody in the long run, including
> myself. And, sorry to say (and I'm speaking entirely in general terms
> here[*]) causing additional work for others is something Debian
> does NOT need. At all.

A "wok around it" reply might cause more work but at least it removes
the delay and anoyance.

> [*] ... and I specifically do not want to imply that anybody whose
> actions or non-visible-actions effect that cause should be forcibly
> removed from their position in any way. Just to forestall further
> misunderstandings, y'know.


Reply to: