Re: Bug#684128: down the memory hole
(No need to CC me, I'm subscribed).
Le jeudi, 4 avril 2013 15.17:09, email@example.com a écrit :
> When read in the context of that particular bug report, I don't see how
> it could possibly be any more relevant, since it refers directly to the
> discussion above.
I disagree: that mail starts with a chat between "Humpty Dumpty" and "Alice",
which both have nothing to do with the bug at hand. There was nothing in the
subject or the first paragraphs of the text that indicated how that story was
related to the choice of binary or decimal disk storage units.
> It's certainly the first time any message I've sent to the Debian BTS
> has been dropped, especially after receiving a confirmation message.
It happens routinely for spam messages.
> > Dropping obvious spam from public archives has nothing to do with
> > "Hystorical Revisionism" or whatever else: don't assume malice here: I
> > think that in this case either the automatic filters or the human
> > triagers have slightly overlooked your mail.
> I suppose it's possible, but I doubt it, for several reasons:
> 1 - the fact that it was archived on the "debian-boot" list, as above,
> suggests that it was accepted by whatever automatic filters actually
> looked at it.
The effort to drop spam from bugreports and from mail archives are different.
And, even if there is an a-priori spam hunt for both, most of the spam hunt
happens a-posteriori through the use (by mere mortals) of the "Report as spam"
buttons on the mailing list archives, and the "This bugreport contains spam"
links on the bottom of the bugreports.
> 5 - you mention human triagers; given the volume of mail that the Debian
> bugtracking system must receive, I cannot believe that more than a tiny
> fraction of it is sent to human spam reviewers.
See above. Mailing-list archives are cleaned using the process described in
http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/ListArchiveSpam . Bugs are (AFAIK)
cleaned by firstname.lastname@example.org, as described on
> > So please, next time something puzzles you similarly, ask for
> > clarification in a neutral way instead of publicly accusing "Debian of
> > operating Historical Revisionism", which is incredibly rude.
> It's only rude if it turns out not to be true. If I'm wrong, I will of
> course retract my comments. But I don't think that I am.
I disagree: public accusation (especially in such heavy terms) is rude as long
as it's unproven. And as far as I'm concerned, you have shown nothing more
than wild-guesses and suspicions.
That said, maybe I haven't made it clear: I think the spam classification that
lead to the removal of that mail from the bugreport was indeed wrong, so I
think the message should (if possible) be re-instated in the bugreport page.
On the other hand, I also think the message was written very wrongly as it was
an attempt to make an already-made point using devil's advocate style. It is
also perfectly fine for such a bug (even with a patch) to stay un-answered
and/or unhandled for months, given the number of active debian-installer
contributors and the status of the Wheezy freeze since then, so I think the
mail was over-the-top and unneeded (but not spam). I just can't bear with
unfounded accusations thrown blindly around.