Hi Ian,
> You mean it works correctly in buster ?
Unfortunately, no. So it is a bug not a regression, you are right.
> Certainly.
Then I will just leave the patch here.
> I don't think this is really an appropriate way to use the "serious"
> severity.
OK, noted tgat. Thanks for pointing that!
> This seems a bit unfriendly to me. Maybe Guido is busy right now.
> We're all volunteers here. If you think you know how to fix the
> problem, you could propose to fix it yourself eg with an NMU, using
> the usual process.
Well, I might have misunderstood the Policy but isnt the NMU while maintainer
is active
a kind of unfriendly takeover? I might misunderstand the Policy then!
If NMU is appropriate here, let me fix other bugs in gbp while Guido is busy.
--
Vasyl Gello
==================================================
Certified SolidWorks Expert
Mob.:+380 (98) 465 66 77
E-Mail: vasek.ge...@gmail.com
Skype: vasek.gello
==================================================
호랑이는 죽어서 가죽을 남기고 사람은 죽어서 이름을 남긴다
1 лютого 2021 р. 12:55:34 UTC, Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
написав(-ла):
>Vasyl Gello writes ("Re: git-buildpackage: import-orig --uscan passes
>--symlink unconditionally"):
>> This is a regression that is easily fixable.
>
>You mean it works correctly in buster ?
>
>> Should I attach the patch here with appropriate patch tag instead?
>
>Certainly.
>
>> As for "it does not cause unrecoverable data loss" - yes, the loss
>> is recoverable. But what if you notice that an inappropriate
>> tarball has been imported by a script only when your CI pipeline
>> fails? And the same wrong tarball poisoned ~10 repos by the time you
>> noticed it?
>
>I can see that this is a nuisance but I think it still does not
>warrant an RC bug. Presumably some script can also fix up the bad git
>trees.
>
>> I raised the severity in hope Guido notices it and the new release
>> gets rolled. My intention is not to remove gbp from bullseye,
>> definitely.
>
>I don't think this is really an appropriate way to use the "serious"
>severity.
>
>> Adding Guido directly because my previous email semt from Gmail has
>> never been answered.
>
>This seems a bit unfriendly to me. Maybe Guido is busy right now.
>We're all volunteers here. If you think you know how to fix the
>problem, you could propose to fix it yourself eg with an NMU, using
>the usual process.
>
>Thanks,
>Ian.
>
