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

Re: package deviates from standard mail-transport-agent dependency.

On Thu, 2008-08-21 at 11:19 +0200, Andreas Henriksson wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 12:37:38AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > Where did you discuss this mass filing of (useless) bugs before you
> > > submitted them?
> The previous discussions has lead nowhere. No use in discussing it yet
> again, instead it's time to act!

Not really. Actions that fail to address the problem and promote a
method that both papers over the cracks and has had a chance to find
support and failed, are (in my estimation) a waste of time. Others would
appear to agree that these bugs are useless. I don't see why any of
these bug reports should not be automatically tagged "wontfix" and
closed without further comment.

> > 
> > In particular, these bugs are *contrary* to the developing consensus in the
> > thread at http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/05/msg00381.html ff.
> There where no consensus,

In fact, there was a resistance against the method that you have decided
to impose unilaterally. Where there was not a definite consensus was on
which of the alternative methods was better.

>  since you where all just discussing overengineered
> solutions for solving the problem and all pointing out bugs in eachothers
> suggestions. 

Throwing those ideas away is not a solution either.

> Using exim4 | mail-transport-agent is the most
> straight-forward solution and will require minimal changes.

In your opinion - others disagreed at the time and appear to disagree
currently too. Mass bug filings need consensus - you cannot impose an
arbitrary time limit and go ahead anyway. This isn't a release goal, it
isn't relevant to the Lenny release, it is just wasting time that could
be better spent on RC bugs.

> When (or even if) the default mta changes, we can easily introduce the
> default-mta then (and maybe people would even have come up with a bug-free
> overengineered solution by then).

Debian does tend to go for the more robust solution - it does take more
time to develop but whether you like it or not, you cannot impose a less
rigorous solution unilaterally.


Neil Williams

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: