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

Re: %20Re: Debian Maintainers GR Proposal

Benjamin BAYART <bayartb@edgard.fdn.fr> wrote:

>>> So here was my practical conclusion: I did send a bug report, useless
>>> during months, and that bug report was used to argue that the package
>>> is
>>> broken and unkaintained and to remove it. Conclusion: reporting on a
>>> un-maintained package is something dangerous.
>>Hm, what was the severity of the bugs you are thinking about?  Where the
>>packages removed due to a couple of unfixed important bugs?
> There was two kinds of bugs in the package:
> - the one I reported, with a patch (segfault on some cases introduced by
>   modern TeX uses)
> - bugs about Debian (version of the standards, version of dh_*, etc)
> Of course, the bugs about Debian were regarded as very serious, and were
> the reason for being a candidate to removal. From a user point of view,
> it sounds like crazy.

I'm not sure what you are talking about exactly, and which package was a
candidate for removal.  dvidvi had a debhelper-related bug (#168387),
but this was not just about a version, it failed to build from source.
This is something we cannot tolerate in a stable release.  

An outdated standards version doesn't make a package a candidate for
removal AFAICT.

Regards, Frank
Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)

Reply to: