Control: tags -1 upstream My this first reply email is lost, I use my Debian email forward it again.
-------- 转发的消息 -------- 主题: Re: Bug#1132795: Drop “Resolution: (not specified)” if no pHYs 日期: Wed, 3 Jun 2026 09:36:26 +0800 发件人: xiao sheng wen(肖盛文) <[email protected]> 回复地址: [email protected] 组织: https://www.atzlinux.com 收件人: Emma Müller <[email protected]>, [email protected] Control: tags -1 upstream Hi, You reply my email to my personally email address only, please CC to [email protected] too. Debian bugreport is public: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1132795 every one can read and reply it. 在 2026/6/3 06:45, Emma Müller 写道: > Hi Xiao! > > Am 02.06.26 um 10:09 schrieb xiao sheng wen(肖盛文): > >> Upstream first, do nice communicate to upstream author is better. > > Yes. If you can think of a nice message to the author that would nudge him to > do what he by default should stand up for (maintain the package), please do. > As for me, given his derisive tone, I cannot come up even with a single word. > >> Certainly, we are all volunteer in open source project, upstream author >> sometimes perhaps >> wouldn't fix some bugs. > > I appreciate your work and the work of the maintainers in general. If an > upstream maintainer plainly rejects to fix a bug, it'd be unfortunate, but > we're used to this, so we sigh and move on in the case of a polite and clear > rejection. > > At the same time, specifically in the case of this bug, something new and > strange happened. Namely, the bug which has to be fixed was introduced by the > AI in the first place, the upstream maintainer did not close the upstream bug > report, and his comment was disrespectful/hostile towards us: as what he says > about the package age and my non-contribution is already known, and what he > says about Debian is wrong, his answer is, put politely, worse than a cynical > smirk; such an unprofessional answer means that something went wrong with > him. Further, the comment smells like being generated by AI > (https://textguard.ai says 67%, and the upstream maintainer is deeply into AI > according to his Web page). What puzzles me is whether there is any way to > positively proceed from here apart from living with the bug. Is any > fork/clone of pnginfo known? The libpng-tools package has one command pngfix can do some png fix. https://libpng.org/pub/png/libpng.html pngchunks /usr/share/inkscape/themes/Minwaita-Inkscape/gtk-3.0/assets/bullet-symbolic.symbolic.png This can get more detail info about png chunks. > >> Debian bugreport is public, perhaps some people would contribute a patch. > > I sincerely hope that you are right and that I'm wrong, but a typical user > won't. (For example, for me, setting up a development environment (which I > don't have installed currently on the production machine, and I have no > usable spare machine), checking out the code, reading it and finding the > culprit, changing the code, testing it, and pushing the changes might be a > full-time job for a few full days, even if I had the rights to push to the > repository.) Certain Linux nerds technically could this and do this > sometimes, but many/most of us, including myself, are already overcommitted > and have to take hard choices on which goals to remove from our huge todo > lists for the next half a century … I'm sorry for my English word. I said the word "some people" who include the open source developer, not only normal end user. The package pngtools is team maintainer by Debian photo team: Debian PhotoTools Maintainers <[email protected]> https://qa.debian.org/[email protected] The Debian bugreport of any package maintainer by Debian photo team also CC to this mailing lists. Our team member will receive this bugreport. https://salsa.debian.org/groups/debian-phototools-team/-/group_members The issue on the upstream github, also is public. https://github.com/mikalstill/pngtools/issues/37 If there one "open source developer" find these information and also has interest to fix this bug, they will do it. Good lucky! -- 肖盛文 xiao sheng wen -- Debian Developer(atzlinux) Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=atzlinux%40debian.org GnuPG Public Key: 0x00186602339240CB
OpenPGP_0x00186602339240CB.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
