Re: Inconsistent spelling of QT and GNOME
Christian Kurz writes:
> On 04/11/01, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> > 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.
Agreed, agreed.
> > 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.
Indeed. Historically, debian-qa have been the people who deal with
orphaned packages - there are moves to make the BTS-generated traffic
from those packages go elsewhere, to reduce the noise level a bit (I
don't really need to know that someone else has uploaded a new version
of $package); I wonder if we didn't do it, whether anyone would.
[GNOME/Qt Vs. Gnome/QT]
> > 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.
Fair enough; there seems to be general agreement that filing wishlist
bug reports would be a sensible initial approach (though there seems
to be some disagreement as to who should do it, and whether -devel
should be told). Personally, I don't think it makes a huge amount of
difference who files the bug reports (I'm not sure a From: line of
debian-qa would be helpful, personally, but I could be persuaded); as
to telling -devel, I'm not sure if that'd make much difference - it
just seemed the natural thing to do to me.
> 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.
Sorry? You were disagreed with, that's all. Disagreement!=personal
attack. Certainly, the comment about needing more sleep was unhelpful,
but you seem to be over-reacting a little to me.
> > 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?
Where have I attacked you? I might have disagreed with your opinions,
but that's not an attack, is it?
Matthew
--
Rapun.sel - outermost outpost of the Pick Empire
http://www.pick.ucam.org
Reply to: