Re: Freeze exception for dpkg 1.14.18
* Raphael Hertzog (email@example.com) [080426 10:22]:
> On Sat, 26 Apr 2008, Luk Claes wrote:
> > > Here's what I would like to suggest as acceptable for lenny (and thus
> > > 1.14.19):
> > Freeze guidelines are not really up to discussion and I don't like that
> > maintainers of key packages send the signal that they don't care about
> > them...
> I'm sorry, I do care about the goal of the freeze: "release a top quality
> distribution in the planned timeframe".
Then stop working against that.
> You should also consider that while dpkg is a key piece of our
> infrastructure, it's also maintained by very active people in the project
> itself and that we know what we are doing.
Ah, you mean like adding LDFLAGS in a way that violates the C-standard
and breaks a couple of packages? Or also the new CFLAGS which brought us
enough new RC bugs and where even Joey Hess complained about and you
miscited the release team in http://bugs.debian.org/476138 (we didn't
say "please break Debian with that now", but we just didn't want to argue
about that too). Frankly speaking, I don't think that you always know
what you're doing.
I would really wish that you stop your way of "Raphael Hertzog is always
right", and starting working together with other people. Which includes
the release team as well as other team. And care about their opinions.
And I need to say that next to all Developers do that - that's btw the
only way to make a release happen.
If you think the release team is wrong, then please try to convince us.
Or if you think that the wrong people are on the release team - feel
free to start an GR to replace us (or convince the DPL). But don't just
upload packages violating the release plannings - I don't want to work
together with the ftp-masters how to use technical barriers on key
packages, that would be ugly.
> In some ways, it seems unfair
> to have similar freeze criteria for external software just packaged by
> Debian and software developed by Debian where we have absolute control
> over it (and where we know what we're doing with it).
It seems to me you don't understand how a release works. We absolutly
need to reduce the amount of changes flowing into testing, to stabilize
testing and to get it stable. Any code part of the build environment of
many packages (like compilers or dpkg) needs to stop changing especially
early, as any behaviour change there can affect all packages and give us
subtle and hard to detect problems. There is no difference in that
aspect between dpkg and gcc, only that dpkg affects way more packages.
> Please think about it.
We will do so. But don't take that as an excuse to continue breaking
Debian. Until any other activly communicated decision of the release
team, the freeze plan is as announced on d-d-a.