Re: Inconsistent spelling of QT and GNOME
Christian Kurz writes:
> On 04/11/01, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Sun, 04 Nov 2001, Christian Kurz wrote:
> So, let's drop the debian-qa list and the whole idea of Debian QA, if QA
> has no authority to make decision about what should be done to improve
> our quality. If this list is simply created to maintain orphaned
Erm. Why? debian-qa exists to improve the quality of Debian - to deal
with bugs that are causing maintainers problems, to NMU packages that
developers aren't dealing with for whatever reason. There's more to it
than just dealing with orphaned packages. We don't have any more
authority than any other developers, though.
> > Which matters little, anyway. I have this hunch a lot of maintainers will
> > simply apply the requested change no matter who asked them to, and many
> > others will simply ignore or get annoyed at 'such an stupid bug report'
> And since this hurts our quality seriously, this change would first need
> to be discussed and especially how it can be made, while ensuring that
> all affected packages will be changed.
You clearly see it as a serious issue; to me it seems a cosmetic thing
- it would be good to fix it, but we don't want to go using up a lot
of time and effort over it. I think -devel is the place to get broad
agreement that filing wishlist bugs (with patches if you're feeling
enthusiastic :) is the right thing to do.
> > Yes, I see. I still think this is -devel matter, and not -qa, but
> Then feel free to write to -devel, I won't do so, since I already broke
> my statement once that I won't send any further e-Mail to -devel and
> won't break it a second time.
You aren't prepared to send mail to -devel? Gosh. I don't read it very
often, but I send mail there from time to time...
Rapun.sel - outermost outpost of the Pick Empire