Re: failure to communicate
On 04/06/2013 12:16 AM, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
> Le vendredi, 5 avril 2013 17.52:19, Thomas Goirand a écrit :
>> On 04/05/2013 07:59 PM, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
>>> And all of these features will only land for the next cycle
>>> with a release in ~= 2 years time.
>> I really hope that it wont be the case. That it doesn't go into
>> Debian 7.0.0, I would understand, but at least, we need it
>> for a point release.
> Are you seriously arguing in favour of pushing a behavioural change into a
> stable point release? I doubt the stable release team would accept that, but
> I'm not under their hats.
I've wrote that we should at least address the issue, in a way
or another, through the next point release if that is safer.
But, are you seriously proposing that we leave the issue as-is ???
>> And at least, we need things written in the release notes about it, if not a
>> message in the installer itself (Christian, don't kill me... ;).
> I disagree. It has worked that way for a long time (and many releases in that
> timeframe), so it is probably not "that" broken.
Well, at least *I* didn't know it was broken (yes, you read
well: BROKEN !!!), and I was quite shocked to read it, Knowing
that absolutely nothing gives you clues about it is equally
shocking. In fact, I saw that strange behaviors, and couldn't
explain it. We are talking about someone who has been using
Debian for 10 years. Now, think about someone who is a new comer...
> I'm not saying the bug isn't valid of course, just that it's severity is IMHO
>> Could we stop the winning and have this bug fixed please,
>> or the patch rejected (with a valid motivation)?
> Could we stop the useless bikeshedding and have Wheezy released please?
Sure. And let's add the fix for the next point release if
everyone think it's not a good idea to fix it right now
(though it's quite a shame we can't).
That's all I'm saying.
> As you know, d-i is critically low on manpower.
Yes, I know. And the patch author is also right to tell that
refusing contribution isn't a good idea to address this lack
As much as I don't agree with his tone, I do agree with
> You want that bug fixed? Great: test the patch, document your tests, upload to
> experimental with the patch, gather feedback, get involved, etc. For a fix to
> land in Wheezy, this should have happened 8 months ago.
Do you believe the legend that d-i was frozen 8 months
ago? I don't... :D
(only half joking here...)
> Now is the time to
> release Wheezy, not the time to add cosmetic and disruptive fixes to it.
I don't agree it is cosmetic. I'm not sure it's disruptive.
> again, I think the changes are probably worthwhile, it's only the timing which
> is wrong.)
Then make your case for the next point release, not
for Jessie, please !