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

Re: Bug#679236: O: ckport -- portability analysis and security checking tool


On Thu, 2012-06-28 at 13:05 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> 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
> > 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.

The problem was caused by Ron Lee being very late and not informing
anybody of what he was doing. Something he always does: wouldn't it be
natural to inform maintainers then removing dependencys and requesting
other packages to do the same? this includes openal, cmus and ices2 for
example. don't know a complet list as Ron is not telling anything...

But I thank you very much for suspecting me to break my own package by
fully ignoring it. Why not first cosider the positive case: The
maintainers working on the problem. That was exactly the case. We
checked a lot options and looked up code. Stuff that not happens in BTS
and that takes time. Time Ron was not giving us.

> 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.

The hate speech was mostly on IRC and mail.

> > 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.

see above.

> > 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.

I think it will stop happening then a random person in the project can
no longer render weeks of work of other persons perfectly useless.
The project should care more for users than internal conflicts like
this. My users already asking me (upstream) what happend. I would be
glad to spend my time to the Debian project in a useful way. But I don't
see how this is given anymore. Also my users complain about the
situation and I'm not willing to be the person they make responsible for
(because I'm in the maintainer team) packages made perfectly useless by

PS: Release wasn't helpful in this case as well. They tell me they have
no opinion and are not interested in getting this fixed for stable (was
asking *before* freeze). I'm not mad on anyone of them personally, just
I don't think it is the right way to go.

 (Rah of PH2)

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

Reply to: