On 10/10/17 11:58, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 12:08:29AM +0100, Ghislain Vaillant wrote:
On 09/10/17 23:06, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 12:28:22PM +0100, Ghislain Vaillant wrote:
...
I was complaining about the insufficiencies behind this RC, more than the
situation with Sphinx. No offense to Adrian, but getting an RC bug reported
without much context to work with is just plain frustrating. Without your
intervention, this RC could have dragged for a long time.
Ghis, I do consider our repeated attempts to blame me for not fixing a bug in
your package VERY offensive.
I don't recall saying anywhere in this thread that I expected *you* to
provide a patch for this. I complained about the lack of context of the
initial bug report, albeit too bluntly to your taste.
...
Your repeated "without much context to work with" are just fancy words
for blaming me for not having debugged a FTBFS in your package.
This interpretation is yours. I acknowledged earlier that nothing was
implied on my end. Whether you believe or not is a different matter and
beyond the point of this thread.
I did tell you everything I knew (including providing the email address
of the person causing the FTBFS in the initial bug report), and it is
not my job to debug a FTBFS in your package.
You were even lucky that I was able to point you at what broke it,
there are more than 200 open RC bugs for FTBFS I reported [1] and
in many cases the error message is all I can provide.
Since you failed to quote the second half of my previous reply, I'll
paste it again:
"Please accept my sincere apologies"
Should you decide to reply to this email, I would appreciate you quoting
it in full instead of selective pieces of it to fulfill your narrative.
I have come clean and apologized for my wrongs, now is the time to shake
hands and move on.
Regards,
Ghis
