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

Re: buildd administration

On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 03:41:06PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> > Sure; but again, look at the broader context: if people aren't fixing
> > trivial bugs like the gnuplot one, why should anyone else spend time
> > worrying about the harder ones? Why haven't you done the appropriate
> > NMU of gnuplot already, eg?
> Because I've already cared more about other people's packages than I
> should have, looking at my non-Debian workload.

Yeah; I didn't mean that you specifically should've done it -- just that
*someone* should've, and hopefully we can generalise from our reasons.

> >> Do you imply that I have the first attitude, and why?
> > In arguing that it's okay not to fix bugs quickly? Definitely. 
> I'm not saying that it's okay not to fix the bugs quickly.  I'm just
> saying that
> - I'm fixing as fast as I can
> - leaving tetex-3.0 in experimental would slow down all that even more. 

Yes; leaving it in experimental for as long as it was was bad too --
we *should* be able to do these things fairly quickly.

> Alternatively, you could work on checking whether our complete building
> toolchain runs smoothly with utf-8, submit the necessary patches, NMU if
> necessary, and have the policy changed that changelog and control must
> be in utf-8.  And I know of more such jobs... :(

I've been hiding from utf8 for years -- I don't know what the above even
means. I did get lintian complaints about my encoding though...


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: