Quoting Scott Kitterman (2016-10-20 16:35:22) > On Thursday, October 20, 2016 04:06:10 PM Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > Quoting Ondřej Surý (2016-10-20 15:48:08) > > > > > to stop you from bickering on and on, the build script can be > > > reconstructed just from reading gulpfile.js and would consist of > > > > > installing ruby-sass, coffeescript and node-uglify and running: > > Fine. > > > > Now, to get back to the original dispute whether serious or not: > > > > *Not* doing above (which in some cases, as you just proved, is simple) > > but instead relying on upstream doing it for us using tools not in > > Debian, is a serious bug in the packaging. > > > > Just as a typo in an argument to ./configure can cause FTBFS which is a > > serious issue. > > > > Severity of bugs is ortogonal to how difficult they are to fix. > > Since you're claiming 'serious', which policy shall requires it?
§4.2 describes as a "must" declaring the build-dependencies needed to "produce working binaries". - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
