Re: Bug#243129: NMU in DELAYED/3-DAY
On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 10:51:39 -0700, Brian Nelson <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> Marc Dequènes (Duck) <Duck@DuckCorp.org> writes:
>> Riku Voipio <email@example.com> writes:
>>> If this upload introduces bugs, upload a package fixing them. If
>>> it doesn't create any bugs, why complain? because someone thought
>>> they could you a bit? Bugs will appear eventually, or maybe a new
>>> upstream version and you will upload anyway later. Or if it really
>>> bugs that much to have someone NMU your package, just upload the
>>> damn dummy package.
>> I fully desagree with this behavior because :
>> 1) i find more respectful to give the maintainer some days to work
>> the problem as requested in the Developer's Manual
>> 2) this was a quick and BAD(tm) fix, probably (i'm working on this
>> "probably") hiding a bigger problem. I really think a NMU must not
>> be "instinctive" uploads.
> Oh, what's the big fucking deal? If you're not happy with the NMU,
> then upload a better package than the one NMU'd. If you do it
> within three days, no one will ever even see the NMU. That seems
> like it would be a lot more productive than these NMU bitchfests.
Indeed, if you think that the NMU is a regression, or has
misfeatures, or would be in the way of the correct fix, you can just
upload a version identical to the current one, with a debian revision
bump, effectively retaining the current version.
Coronation, n.: The ceremony of investing a sovereign with the outward
and visible signs of his divine right to be blown skyhigh with a
dynamite bomb. Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C