Re: Forwarding bugs upstream
Russ Allbery <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> What I think many people are saying in this thread is that, among all
> the things that a Debian package maintainer could do to improve the
> package and user experience of those using the package, being a
> go-between for Debian bug reporters and upstream is something they
> consider low priority. It may be something they'd be willing to do if
> they have free time after doing other work, or it may be so
> low-priority that it's below the threshold of work they're willing to
> volunteer for, but either way it's just less important than other
> things that need doing and therefore will often go undone.
> That seems like a reasonable position to take to me.
And to me. None of that argues against the maintainer role entailing
that work, though.
> So there doesn't seem to be much point in discussing things from that
Right. My point with raising it was merely to show that it goes both
ways: there's not much point saying “you have to do the work”, just as
there's not much point saying “nobody can force me to do anything”.
Either of those simply polarises the discussion, which is not helpful.
Rather, I'm arguing that the maintainer role, as a mediator and
interface between upstream and the Debian user, entails a whole lot of
different tasks, and being a mediator in the discussion between
Debian-user-with-a-bug-report is part of that role.
To argue that is *not* to require or demand that anyone do any work, nor
to strip anyone of their role. I wish I knew how to avert the seemingly
inevitable charges of that which arise any time we discuss what the
maintainer role entails.
\ “When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. |
`\ Then I realised that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole |
_o__) one and asked Him to forgive me.” —Emo Philips |