Re: Should debian policy require to use debconf for postinst scripts?
On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 07:58:26PM +0100, Massimo Dal Zotto wrote:
> > The lack of automatic installation is the reason why I don't install
> > Debian any more for my customers.
>
> Oh, and to clarify: I completely agree. This is, IMO, the biggest missing
> feature in Debian at the moment.
>
> But the way to go about ensuring that feature is implemented is for the
> people who care about it to send in patches and talk to the maintainers of
> packages who have problems with the patches sent in. There's obviously
> a whole bunch of people interested in this: subscribe to debian-qa,
> make a list of packages, and start fixing them.
There are the usual problems:
- the "evil maintainer" that simply refuses patches
- several of our 900 maintainers are completely MIA and a wishlist bug
isn't a good reason for a NMU
> Imagining that changing policy is like waving a magic wand and'll suddenly
> make everything all wonderful and work just the way you want it to with
> no effort on your part is a delusion. Forget it, and move on already.
Is our main goal to give a c00l @debian.org address to everyone or to make
a high quality distribution?
Seriously:
If there's something that makes things for many people easier (IMHO
debconf is an example) and if we give the maintainers enough time (read
several months or years) it's IMHO correct to force every maintainer to
do a change.
> Cheers,
> aj
cu
Adrian
--
Get my GPG key: finger bunk@debian.org | gpg --import
Fingerprint: B29C E71E FE19 6755 5C8A 84D4 99FC EA98 4F12 B400
Reply to: