Re: Help to clarify an issue
On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 06:38:20PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 01:23:51PM -0200, Herbert Fortes wrote:
> > Can someone read the bug report[0] an give
> > an second opinion?
> >
> > [0] - https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=885404
> >
> > We disagree when an NMU is necessary and how
> > important the request is.
>
> wow - wtf.
>
> I'll keep my comments here structured:
>
> 1) I believe Jonathan is very very hasty on making NMUs
> a) whilst true that NMUs today are seen very much with a nicer eye than
> in the past, it's still considered not something to do lightly, not
> even when somebody is on the LowNMU list or the package is in
> collab-maint
> b) also, upload an NMU the day after saying he has a patch and 3 days
> after the original bug report is totally hasty, no matter the delay
> c) and usually as soon as the maintainer replies to a bug all the
> intentions to NMU drops in favour of a team upload (unless the
> maintainer asks for a NMU, as it often happens)
> 2) I totally don't understand what's Herbert's problem with the
> proposal, providing /usr/bin/duc from both the regular and -nox
> package sounds a very nice idea to me
Well said, I agree 100%.
I consider both parties to be wrong here:
* Jonathan went very hasty on the NMU
* Herbert refuses a patch for a quite annoying thing, fixing which requires
no effort on his side (as the submitter did all the work), without
providing any rationale
It's a clear bug to me: the package behaves in a different way based on
whether an unrelated doodad (some X stuff) is installed or not. That breaks
people's muscle memory, requiring user's effort for every single machine the
package is installed on -- or, on every invocation, thinking "is this shell
on a GUI machine?". And I for one ssh to my home desktop a lot.
"because one does not want to press tab" is a ridiculous explanation.
Thus, Herbert: could you please tell us if you have any reason to reject the
fix, other than being annoyed with a NMU done in a wrong way?
> Summary: please just stop meta-discussing whether or not a NMU was the
> appropriate action to take, and start discussing the actual bug, with
> neither party being so stubborn as it looks from my side.
Yeah, Jonathan's error was formal, while the bug applies to actual
functionality.
Meow!
--
// If you believe in so-called "intellectual property", please immediately
// cease using counterfeit alphabets. Instead, contact the nearest temple
// of Amon, whose priests will provide you with scribal services for all
// your writing needs, for Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory prices.
Reply to: