Re: Bug#797860: [RFR] templates://open-iscsi/{open-iscsi.templates}
Thanks for reviewing!
Just a comment:
Justin B Rye wrote:
Christian PERRIER wrote:
Template: open-iscsi/downgrade_and_break_system
@@ -51,7 +55,7 @@
_Description: Do you really want to downgrade open-iscsi?
Why not like the first?
_Description: Proceed with downgrading open-iscsi?
(Though I really hope this isn't corporate systems policy!)
I'm surprised it checks for this - I'm used to the idea that
downgrades being unsupported (and purge-and-reinstall being the safe
alternative) is just the general rule in Debian. In fact I would
assume anybody who tried downgrading something this crucial was
crazy,
but it's nice that we're covering this scenario.
Well, techincally this notice is only shown for downgrades to version
2.0.873+git0.3b4b4500-9 or lower. There is no way this can work, the
system will be in a broken state afterwards, and without knowing
intricate details about the packaging, it's going to be really
difficult to recover from that. For other downgrades we currently don't
care (they won't break even remotely as badly as this one), and we plan
to remove the message again after Stretch is released.
Meanwhile in the control file:
Description: High performance, transport independent iSCSI
implementation
This is upstream's description of the project as a whole, mostly
focussing on its kernel side; it doesn't work very well as a summary
of this package. "Implementation" is one of those words (like
"open-source" and "software") that's a waste of space in a synopsis -
everything's an implementation of some idea or other. Since all of
this blurb is immediately repeated in the first line of the long
description I would suggest trimming the synopsis right down to
something that actually says what's in the package:
Description: iSCSI management tools
Actually, if we are changing the description of the package as well,
I'd rather be more specific:
Description: iSCSI initiator tools
Because there are also iSCSI targets packaged in Debian (iscsitarget,
targetcli), and management seems to be too generic of a word.
Thanks,
Christian
Reply to: