Re: Question for candidate Towns [Was, Re: DPL election IRC Debate - Call for questions]
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 06:15:10PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 12:20:36AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 03:11:02PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 04:54:34PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > Here is the relevant section of the .changes file for the package in
> > > question:
> > > Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 17:40:59 +0100
> > > Source: kernel-latest-powerpc
> > > [...]
> > > Changes:
> > > kernel-latest-powerpc (101) unstable; urgency=low
> > > .
> > > * Typo in debian/control created kernel-headers-2.-powerpc instead of
> > > kernel-headers-2.. Fixing this means another wait in the NEW queue :(
> > > This merely underscores the contrast between Anthony's recommendation --
> > > being resourceful enough to find a way to achieve the things you care about
> > > when no one is interested in helping you -- and what you've done in this
> > > case -- whine that a name change on *headers* metapackages that are used
> > > nowhere in the installer prevented you from improving the quality of that
> > > installer.
> > It was a damn typo i oversighted in the 100 version. And the mention that
> > itmeans a wait in the NEW queue was in no way a whining, but an informative
> > mention to whoever would look in the svn archive for the package wondering why
> > this problem (which marked kernel-latest-powerpc uninstallable for almost two
> > month) was indeed solved and waiting in NEW.
> > and notice that these packages are not used on powerpc because Kamion didn't
> > modify base-installer to use them, while they are used (unless i am mistaken)
> > in the x86 case, and in general are meant to be used, which makes changing
> > kernel possible without rebuilding the base-installer .udeb, and thus allows
> > more flexibility.
> According to the changes file, the changes found in the version of
> kernel-latest-powerpc that was stuck in NEW were *completely orthogonal* to
> the use of these kernel-image metapackages could be used from within
> base-installer. NEW processing has *nothing* to do with why base-installer
> wasn't updated, and you are way off-base in blaming the ftpmasters for this.
Please ask Kamion about this, since he told me he couldn't make the
base-installer changes because of this.
Really, you have no clue, why do you speak of these things, and are not even
capable to communicate with your fellow RMs ?