On 2020.05.09 22:20, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Thu, 2020-05-07 at 14:23 +0100, Pete Batard wrote: [...]I specifically designed the patch I submitted for easy review and integration, because there are missing elements from 4.x that are present in 5.x, that we have to compensate for. I would rather not have to split it, especially as I believe it should be included as a matter of priority and we're simply adding delays.I personally find it much easier to review backports in this form, and it is the usual practice in Debian to backport changes in this form where possible.
Then you should have asked for that 3 months ago.Sorry but that mistakes of not following up on the patch I submitted in a reasonable timeframe, or understanding its context and priority level is entirely on you.
I have tried all the means I knew to bring attention to this patch for weeks that followed its submission (including posting about it in various Debian mailing lists, including arm64 and debian-release), and nothing happened, and especially nobody provided any inkling about the submission needing to be split, so you genuinely have exhausted all of the good will I had on that topic.
Moreover, if you are taking my refusal to split the patch as an excuse not to produce your own effort to include it in the next release, then you are simply corroborating the idea I have established that Debian appears to have no clue about the level of importance it should actually allocate to the underlying problem this is attempting to solve, and, furthermore, that it may simply be looking for a way out of a situation it mishandled.
In other words, I am waiting to see a real concerted effort on your side before I decide whether I am willing to contribute any further, and insistance on asking me to perform work that, if you understood the actual severity of the situation, you should be more than willing to perform yourself as a matter of urgency, simply indicates that you still haven't understood the nature of the underlying situation. As a direct result of that, I have good reasons to estimate that further involvement from my side is simply not worth the trouble, because it appears that you are still going to be bouncing, delaying or mishandling the ability for RPi4 users to install Debian from vanilla Debian ISOs.
Therefore either you understand the importance of the problem, and are willing to perform the work required to reorganize the submission according to your *preferences*. Or you continue to hint that you don't, and instead try to place the blame on someone from whom you have long exhausted any willingness to contribute to something they have good reasons to believe, from the continued unwillingness to take the necessary actions on your side, is most likely going to amount to *another* completely wasted effort.
In other words, I will need to see some real good will from Debian in the matter of trying to salvage the current RPi4 situation before I decide to get involved in trying to contribute again. Thus, in case this was not clear, let me be explicit in saying that you are not going to see any further contribution from me until you have made some visible effort to remedy that.
Regards, /Pete