On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 10:38:42AM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > Picture this: a cocktail party. Many people mingling around, dressed > up and engaging in smalltalk, sipping colourful drinks. A new couple > arrives and is immediately surrounded by old fiends. "Hi, Jack and > Joan, how are you? How is that lovely offspring of yours?" The couple > look down, and their faces get a careful, blank expression. "It's not > good. We don't know what we did wrong. We're so ashamed. We don't know > how such a thing could happen. We thought we were such good parents." > A shocked silence fall on the group, in the middle of the hubbub of > the greater party. "You see, our child, our child..." Jack sobs and > can't get the words out, so Joan takes a deep breath and speaks. "Our > child wrote a test that fails randomly, and released it." One by one > their friends leave the group, quietly, and without speaking a single > harsh syllable. But for months, they had to wait for an invitation to > a new party.
LOL, but I don't see a lot of social exclusion here: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?users=sanv...@debian.org;tag=ftbfs-randomly Sometimes I've seen maintainers downgrade FTBFS bugs to "wishlist"! Surely I will not invite those maintainers to a party, but they are still maintaining Debian packages. Should I ask the Technical Committee to rule out that FTBFS bugs are RC, even if they did not happen in buildd.debian.org yet? Thanks.
