Re: Bug#679236: O: ckport -- portability analysis and security checking tool
Philipp Schafft writes ("Re: Bug#679236: O: ckport -- portability analysis and security checking tool"):
> On Wed, 2012-06-27 at 22:50 +0200, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
> > What is the link between celt and ckport? I mean, why does this orphaning
> > message refers (implicitely) to celt?
>
> The CELT problem as been fixed. The problem with Ron Lee is that he
> removed all rdepends on libroar wich makes it useless *AFTER* the CELT
> problem has been fixed. In fact I know of no problem with libroar wich
> justify such a step (-> removing all rdeps means making it unusable for
> it's users -> no need to skip it anymore). There are *no* open bug
> reports nor was I informed of any problem using another channel.
According to
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=674649
the dependency on celt was removed from libroar on the 6th of June.
> >from libao's changelog (1.1.0-2):
> > * End the grief with roar.
> > Too many people now have been through all the stages of Denial, Anger,
> > Bargaining, and Depression with it, so it's time to accept the only
> > sensible course of direct action that remains to preserve sanity.
> > Closes: #667039
>
> The bug only asks for updating a recommends after transition (SONAME
> change).
This was on the 2nd of June. At this stage, a few weeks before
freeze, libao was inheriting the problems of celt via roaraudio. When
celt is removed by its maintainer, libao would become uninstallable.
Given that you as the roaraudio maintainer had strongly resisted Ron's
efforts to fix this in roaraudio, even to the point of objecting to a
proposed NMU, Ron had no other real option at that point.
I do agree that his words were harsh and it would have been better if
the changelog entry had been more polite. But I don't think it
amounts to hate speech.
> In addition I needed to listen a lot to his hate speach against me on
> IRC and bugs, ....
Unless you have better examples, you are overreacting.
> As nobody seemd to be interested in this case I decided to leave the
> Debian project. I don't see a point in getting flamed for trying my very
> best to ensure quality of packages just to finally waste my time by
> other people rendering the packages useless.
It is of course always sad to see someone leave. Often in the past we
have had people driven out by poor behaviour of other members of the
project. But based on what I've seen I don't think that's the case
here.
The reason I am explaining all this is not to persuade you. I'm
explaining it in the hope that others in the project will see what has
happened and avoid similar situations in the future.
Ian.
Reply to: