[If you really need to send people a Cc altough there header contains
"Mail-Copies-To: never", then please at least mark it as copy.]
On 04/11/01, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> 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
That's only a part of QA and not the only thing that affects the quality
of a distribution. Having useful and consistent package descriptions is
also part of the quality of a distribution.
> than just dealing with orphaned packages. We don't have any more
Which hopefully moves to an extra list and therefor an extra group
taking care of this. Orphaned packages are not directly an issue for the
QA, since they can have a high quality still.
> > > 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
And that's why I thaught that issue and the best solution which one the
hand fix it and on the other hand doesn't need much effort should be
discussed here. But now I learned that my understanding of quality
doesn't compare well with the one of other developers and that I better
shut up and never mention anything anymore in here.
> > > 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...
Sorry, but if you don't know my reasons for not sending anymore an
e-Mail to -devel, then would you please stop attacking me?
Christian
--
Debian Developer (http://www.debian.org)
1024/26CC7853 31E6 A8CA 68FC 284F 7D16 63EC A9E6 67FF 26CC 7853
Attachment:
pgpT8ggShg9tm.pgp
Description: PGP signature