[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Request for freeze exception: apt-cacher-ng

Eduard Bloch <edi@gmx.de> writes:

> #include <hallo.h>
> * Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt [Sun, Sep 14 2008, 12:05:54AM]:
>> Eduard Bloch <edi@gmx.de> writes:
>> > apt-cacher-ng was frozen in Lenny at the revision 0.2.2-1.
>> > Unfortunatelly, this happened in the middle of a major rewrite, which I
>> > consider almost finished with current Sid version.
>> When we've frozen lenny, we planned to not include any more disruptive
>> changes - a major rewrite is such a change we would like to avoid if
>> possible. From what I can see in the BTS, the version currently in lenny
>> works fine, so the risk of breaking anything by including an unfinished
>> major rewrite seems unreaonsably high.
> Wait a second, how can you think it's "just fine"

I haven't said that, read again.

There's no release critical bug reported against the version in
lenny. However, that version *has* had sufficient testing to assume that
every serious bug should have been noticed until now. You propose to
replace this tested version by a major rewrite. From your point of view
as author and maintainer, that might seem like a reasonable idea - from
my point of view, it's not.

> And sorry for going ad hominem but that's just like a slap in my face.

Yes, I love these discussions too.

BOFH #309:
firewall needs cooling

Attachment: pgpifQML6Ezh0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: