On Wed, 2007-07-04 at 18:26 +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > On Wednesday 04 July 2007 18:14, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > I'm trying to find out who has responsibility for Bug #430646. It's a > > critical bug, which should normally get some attention, and mail to > > debian-kernel on the question, by at least a half-dozen people, has > > gotten no response that I can see. > > I doubt that that BR deserves an RC severity to be honest. Really? The package *has no module*. It is a package which exists *only to provide a module*. Therefore it seems squarely to be one which "makes the package in question unusable or mostly so". It's like shipping a bash package which doesn't have bash. > Sure. I know the team is somewhat understaffed when it comes to general > issues like this. They'll probably get around to it with the next > scheduled upload. > > I personally think that just sending a polite reminder to the BR or trying > to ping someone on IRC (#debian-kernel surprisingly enough) would likely > be more effective than posturing on this list. Instead of assuming that I'm posturing. Let's see: I did try to send such a polite reminder, of course. Did you check the debian-kernel logs? Or even this very thread, where a half-dozen mails have been sent? How am I supposed to guess what IRC channel it is? Hint: asking. But you object to asking; you call it "posturing". Not *everything* is an attack. I would just like to have someone responsible for the package say *something* about their intentions. Thomas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part