On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 04:54:34PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 06:12:03AM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote: > > Sven Luther wrote: > > >>It's hard to take this sort of discussion as anything but an attack on > > >>ftpmaster, since there are plenty of teams in Debian that're even less > > >>transparent and effective than us. But given how these sorts of > > >But they are less a hindrance to the daily work of maintainers, and can > > >thus > > >more easily be avoided/worked around/whatever.
> > If you think ftpmaster is a hindrance to your daily work, it's trivial
> > to avoid it -- upload to your own site instead, or to people.debian.org.
> And hack debian-installer to by default get powerpc kernels out of a personal
> archive ? I almost did that when NEW processing disintegrated two years ago
> during the compromise, but i don't think this is compatible with the
> release-management work surrounding the d-i.
> As a result of 1 and a half month waiting in processing the
> kernel-latest-powerpc metapackage for example, we will not have support for it
> in d-i rc3, for example, and thus future upgrades of kernels installed with it
> will be problematic.
Here is the relevant section of the .changes file for the package in
question:
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 17:40:59 +0100
Source: kernel-latest-powerpc
[...]
Changes:
kernel-latest-powerpc (101) unstable; urgency=low
.
* Typo in debian/control created kernel-headers-2.[46]-powerpc instead of
kernel-headers-2.[46]. Fixing this means another wait in the NEW queue :(
This merely underscores the contrast between Anthony's recommendation --
being resourceful enough to find a way to achieve the things you care about
when no one is interested in helping you -- and what you've done in this
case -- whine that a name change on *headers* metapackages that are used
nowhere in the installer prevented you from improving the quality of that
installer.
And with all that, the kernel-latest-powerpc package is still in an RC
broken state, because you chose to make a last-minute reorganization of
kernel-patch-powerpc-2.4.27 without updating kernel-latest-powerpc to match.
You can hardly blame the ftpmasters for this state of affairs.
> And we will soon upload 2.6.11 kernels, which will mean handling of N+1 NEW
> packages, where N is the number of architectures supporting the 2.6 kernels.
> This could easily enough be automated, and i don't think the NEW reporting to
> the US agencies needs to go done to the level of renamed binary packages or
> new versions of basically the same thing.
Frankly, looking at the frequency and timing of some of your package name
changes, I think having ftpmaster oversight here is a very, very good thing.
None of this is on-topic for -vote, but I felt the outlandish claims that
ftpmasters were causing delays for d-i RC3 should not be allowed to stand
unchallenged. If you really feel compelled to argue about this further,
please take it to debian-devel, where explanations of why gratuitous package
name changes are bad are on-topic. M-F-T set accordingly.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
