Re: [Pkg-dns-devel] Bug#833309: "Browserified" stuff (knot-resolver-module-http: please package embedded epoch.js separately)
On October 20, 2016 7:15:45 PM EDT, Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>Joerg Jaspert writes ("Re: [Pkg-dns-devel] Bug#833309: "Browserified"
>stuff (knot-resolver-module-http: please package embedded epoch.js
>separately)"):
>> On 14466 March 1977, Ondřej Surý wrote:
>> > If you insist I can add build.sh script to the missing-source, but
>>
>> No, you do not put it in missing-source foo. You use it during the
>build
>> of your package, thats the correct thing to do.
>
>I agree almost completely. (You missed out an apostrophe.)
>
>> > that's a new information for me that we are now doing distro
>> > just for hipsters that can't read and write more than one twitter
>> > message at the time, and can't read a simple makefile.
>>
>> [You] forgot later updates to the package not done by you. There is
>> no reason why a security team should have to learn the above steps.
>They
>> should edit the source and just build the package and that should do
>the
>> right thing.
>
>I agree - modulo your use of an insult, which I have redacted (see
>below).
>
>> Not needing to dig up whatever crap may be needed for
>> todays hip sillyscript transformation.
>
>However, I think this kind of language is is really beyond the pale at
>least for debian-devel. If you want to rant like that please keep it
>to places where the people you are insulting are absent.
>
>I recommend bars. (Having just got back from the pub myself, where we
>had some good times ranting about various crap.)
>
>Thanks,
>Ian.
It would be nice if the language police could give it a rest. Personally, I don't see that as being significantly different than "signed image malarkey" (to quote from another thread).
Scott K
Reply to: