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

Re: buildd administration

Marc Haber <mh+debian-devel@zugschlus.de> writes:

>>> (BTW, I see #335981 and #336371 haven't received a response since late
>>> October; or has raptor been down that entire time, so that you haven't been
>>> able to diagnose it further -- it certainly seems down now?)
>>Upstream is working on #335981 and #336371.  In fact, scm has *never*
>>supported s390; when I took over maintenance of the package I opened
>>the bugs so that it could be more effectively tracked.
>>And since I am the one who opened #335981, I don't really think a
>>reply to myself is all that necessary.
> I disagree. The BTS is a public repository, available to the general
> public. If there is more information to a bug available, the BTS is
> the place where it should be.

So why has nobody asked about the bug?  There is *always* more
information available, for every bug.  For every bug, there is always
some question I could ask about the bug.  The maintainer should be
willing to anticipate the question, but need not spend gobs of energy
*anticipating* every possible question and logging the answers in the

However, since people have invented a wholly fictitious interest in
this particular bug, I have tagged it with the relevant information.

Now, let's review the show so far.

People have been upset and critical about the miserable nonperformance
of the keyring and the buildd maintainers.  Especially they have been
upset and critical about nonresponsiveness, about an unwillingness to
answer questions and detail approaches, about an unwillingness to
admit when things are too much work.

Anthony decided that the best way to demonstrate what's so awful about
those upset critical complaints was to invent a fictitious interest in
a bug in a package that isn't even released, which I only began
maintaining recently, and which I've been working seriously on getting

Moreover, in response to the critical email, I have demonstrated a
willingness to engage the issue.  I have not maintained utter silence,
I have not said it is unfair to ask questions, I have not, in fact,
done any of the things that the keyring/buildd maintainers do.

So now, I think I have demonstrated that I am ready and willing to do
what I expect of other developers, especially those in
single-point-of-failure positions.  Will Anthony and others now pony
up, and instead of stamping their feet and crying about how everyone
doesn't kowtow to them, start aggressively *solving* problems,
starting with *their own* problems?


Reply to: