Re: Reporting bugs in Stable
On Mon 20 Apr 2020 at 00:11:08 (-0700), Ihor Antonov wrote:
> On Sunday, 19 April 2020 23:30:43 PDT Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > On Du, 19 apr 20, 13:28:57, Ihor Antonov wrote:
> > > Reporting from Debian Sid, everything is quite stable. I do run ZFS on
> > > root
> > > and make snapshots prior to big upgrades as a pre-caution, but so far
> > > I did not have a reason to revert anything.
> >
> > It's just a matter of time. Even if Debian does much more automated
> > testing now than in the past some serious issues could still slip
> > through.
>
> I know, for me this is exactly the point: unstable becomes stable only if
> someone uses it and finds out issues, reports/fixes them.
>
> > > I was using Archlinux for a long time, and I can say that Sid feels
> > > more stable than Archlinux, although software is less fresh. But
> > > overall quite usable as a daily driver on my Lenovo X1 Extreme
> >
> > As far as I know Archlinux is also not a beginners distro (like Mint or
> > Ubuntu), so issues that may appear trivial to you can be major
> > showstoppers for others.
>
> Absolutely, no disputing that.
> I was trying to make a point that "unstable", despite scary name is quite
> usable. Also as someone mentioned - backports should be the first option to try
> if you run stable. I run a few servers stable + backports and everything is
> rock-solid.
>
> But I am afraid that we have deviated from the original topic. If I
> understood Carl correctly - he was expressing his pain because of
> bureaucratic scrutiny of filing bugs to stable that brings absolutely no
> results.
"Told not to bother" and "bureaucratic scrutiny" don't exactly explain
the problem.
> I can't help much here as I am just a mere user, but IMHO if software
> in stable does not work - it is a severe bug.
A bit of an assumption here. There are such things as normal and minor
bugs, and also the fact that many users may never happen upon the
circumstances that trigger a bug's effect. That's one of the reasons
they need reporting.
> It has to be either fixed or
> software should be removed from stable.
Steady on: we want some software to remain available. Even some
serious and important bugs may have no effect on users' workflow,
or be easily worked around if people are able to find out that
they exist (by being reported).
Cheers,
David.
Reply to: