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

Re: Bug#835533: dasher: Please package Dasher 5.0 beta

Paul Wise, on Thu 06 Oct 2016 11:40:12 +0800, wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 12:53 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > So if some of these packages is falling down, the debian-accessibility
> > team *has* to be notified so we can find a solution. Maybe we should
> > put in the ftp-master process that an RM request for any kind of
> > accessibility-related package shouldn't be processed without an ACK from
> > the debian-accessibility team?
> These kind of issues aren't specific to removal of accessibility
> packages;

The kind of issue isn't specific indeed. But the consequence is
specific: the result is that some people can not use Debian any more at
all. That's very different from just missing a program you really want
to have.

Scott Kitterman, on Thu 06 Oct 2016 00:08:19 -0400, wrote:
> It's extremely rare that a removal is problematic.  It does happen and in 
> cases where it does, the FTP team is generally happy to expedite a package 
> back through New.
> Speaking only for myself, I think the level of work implied in your request 
> translates into removals don't happen.  If you think this work should be done, 
> I encourage you to comment on the removal bugs requesting that the removal be 
> held in abeyance while you do it (also adding a moreinfo tag is helpful).

I'm not sure to understand what you meant exactly here.
debian-accessibility wasn't aware of the RM request before it was
processed. Realizing that and having to go through NEW again is not
technically hard, sure, but it takes a lot of energy to go pass the
frustration that it happened at all.


Reply to: