Re: Bug#455769: same problem on wheezy + Thinkpad X220T
On 28/03/13 16:14, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 03/28/2013 06:47 PM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> On 28/03/13 11:06, Julien Cristau wrote:
>>> Control: severity -1 important
>>> I am raising this bug to critical, as it meets the definition "makes
>>> unrelated software on the system (or the whole system) break"
>>> No, it does not. hw will shut itself off before getting damaged.
>> Would you provide a guarantee to all users of wheezy that you will pay
>> for their laptop repair if this issue causes damage?
>> Having the hardware shutdown like that is also a nasty thing that
>> involves the user losing unsaved work, maybe corrupting preferences for
>> their desktop if they are unlucky.
>> This problem happens regularly enough that Debian should not be promoted
>> for laptops if it is not taken seriously as an RC issue. Users will get
>> a very bad impression if basic things like this aren't working in a
>> stable release.
> This isn't the first time that you are discussing the severity of
> bugs, and raising them to RC level instead of what they deserve,
> which was the original severity. You did that to some of my
> packages (for example, see #695221, for which my upload of
> the fix is by the way overdue...).
If a package fails to do what it is supposed to do, isn't that a valid
argument that it is RC?
gnome-power-manager is meant to suspend a user's laptop when they shut
the lid and put it in a carry bag. That's what the manual says. If it
can't do that, is the package suitable for release?
Thomas, you have put a lot of great work into the XCP packages and I'm
glad I've tried them. I've also provided diagnostic information,
patches and workarounds for those issues that I felt to be RC, so that
the users can have the best possible experience of your packages.
> It seem to me that you believe only RC bugs can be fixed in the
> (next) stable distribution. This reasoning is wrong. The release
> team has by the way confirmed this. I did already fixed many
> non-RC bugs in Wheezy, and the release team has accepted
> them. There are hundreds (thousands?) of such examples.
No, that is not my reasoning here. My feeling is that these are issues
which can and probably should be fixed before a release, to take off the
rough edges and/or ensure users have a relatively smooth experience.
Among other things, many people take pride in referring to the
legendary stability of stable Debian releases, and it is often
emphasized that these releases only come when ready... some of these
issues make me feel that something is not quite ready, but very close to
it, and it would be a shame to compromise.
> I'd like to kindly tell you that such BTS ping-pong is completely
> pointless. Raising the severity of bugs will have absolutely zero
I clearly understand your previous feedback and agree, that is why I
thought it might be helpful discussing this issue on debian-devel, to
get a feel for how the community feels about this type of issue and it's
severity for us and for users
> effect. It will not help to find the problem, and it will not help to
> fix it either. Finally, it is up to the package maintainer to have
> the final decision (or even, up to the release team) about the
> severity of bugs. The fact that you find a particular bug quite
> annoying, or affecting you, doesn't change that fact.
As you can see from the contributions on the XCP bugs (where I've
provided workarounds and patches and filled gaps in the documentation),
the issues don't stop me using the packages at all. I'm just thinking
about how other users will feel, particularly if they don't have the
same capacity (or time) to investigate and resolve such issues.