On Sat, Dec 10, 2005 at 03:51:36PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes: > > (a) seeing if the FTBFS can be fixed immediately, and finding it can't > > (b) documenting (this is the transparent bit, so pay attention) that > > fact by not having s390 incorrectly listed as a supported arch in > > the source and ensuring it does not incorrectly indicate a known > > broken build is successful as it did in the past > > (c) informing ftpmaster that the build currently in the archive is > > broken by filing a bug requesting the broken build be removed > > (you know, communicating with people) > > (d) downgrading the bug so that it is not incorrectly listed as > > a RC issue that the RM and QA teams have to attend to > > (e) as maintainer, work with upstream and porters to fix the > > downgraded but still open bug we were just talking about > I disagree with this. Then you're not maintaining your packages properly, and you're making life more difficult for the rest of the project out of spite. Congratulations. Cheers, aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature