On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 06:02:35PM +0100, Iain Lane wrote: > - File a bug on something (I suggest that you don't start with Snappy > to head off reactions like mine) requesting such a move and see if > ftpmaster does it, then MBF all of the rest if so. You're asking liw to change his behaviour (don't start with snappy) based on how *others* may mis-interpret or mis-behave, rather than due to any particular property of the software itself, which I don't think is fair. This was raised in the context of snappy (this time) so it is reasonable for Lars (or whoever) to start there too. You haven't gone as far as to say this, but just to head this off at the pass: it's also not reasonable to expect Lars or anyone else to identify and MBF *all* such similar packages in Debian themselves, either, as a pre-requisite for addressing Snappy. I agree it should be done and I agree that Debian should be consistent, but the work does not need to take place all at the same time, and known bugs in one package should not be prevented from being fixed because they an equivalent bug hasn't been addressed in another. > - Ask ftpmaster for a ruling. It makes sense to me for ftpmaster to make their opinion known on this issue, rather than read the tea leaves as to their opinion. They won't "own" a bug against snappy, so I'll start by CCing them here. > - Try to start a GR. I would suggest CTTE before GR, but it shouldn't get as far as either IMHO. -- Jonathan Dowland Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature