Santiago Vila <sanv...@unex.es> (2014-11-05): > Yes, I am upset, because I've explained too many times already why it > is not a bug in base-files, and why trying to fix it in base-files > would be a complete and ugly hack, and yet people keep filing bugs > about base-files, killing the messenger, so to speak.
I've seen/suffered from many duplicates when I worked on X packages, and yes, reassigning and forcemerging take a mail every time. But it shouldn't be too bad if you use "affects" so that the "main" bug report shows up in your package's bug list as well. > I'm not calling Adam's proposal insane. His proposal is just wrong. > What I was calling insane is the fact that we are still having this > discussion instead of making a debootstrap upload for stable. The situation could probably have started (and/or continued) in a better way if there would have been less fingerpointing/shooting the messenger/whatever you call it. But, from where I stand, several developers were actually checking facts after I cherry-picked the patch in to the stable branch, and I decided to wait and see where the situation was going. Apparently there are several views on the matter, and without commenting on their respective relevance, I'd like to emphasize several things: - Developers have limited free time. - Developers might be getting ready for the imminent freeze. - Uploading to stable means making sure the fix is right, rather than uploading hastily. - Uploads to stable don't appear magically on users' systems a few hours later; it takes a point release or users' having configured s-p-u in their sources.list; so I don't think any haste (see previous point) would help anyway. - Uploads to stable have to be reviewed by release team members, who might also be busy dealing with a flood of freeze-related requests at the moment. So I'd suggest taking a step back, reassigning/forcemerging reports when you have time for that, and waiting for some feedback; probably from me. Mraw, KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
