On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 21:30:22 +0000 Stuart Herbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 21:04 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | > Ok, so given that this is a closed source application, if upstream | > won't cooperate on something as simple as this, why do you expect | > them to cooperate with you on bugs or security issues? | | That's not the issue here. The issue here is whether the QA team is | entitled to be requesting the removal of packages in this specific | instance.
The issue is whether you have the right to leave broken packages in the tree. I don't see any policy document granting you that right. | There are never any guarantees that any UPSTREAM will co-operate with | us on bugs or security issues. If we can't live with the issues, and | we can't fix them, the packages get dropped. I've no problem with | that. Sure. And if upstream won't even cooperate to the extent of renaming a file, how do you expect them to react when we require something less trvial? | > | Everything else is up for discussion. I think it's unreasonable | > | to say that I'm refusing to work with you. | > | > You're repeatedly closing off the bug rather than suggesting | > alternative ways of fixing the issue. | | I think, in this specific case, there are better things to spend the | time on. I don't have a queue of users telling me that the way we | handle this today is a problem. There's no evidence that, in this | specific case, there is a problem out in the real world. It's so bad a problem that you even had to document it in the user guide and tell people to use some nasty hacked workaround. | Hang on a moment. It's not clear to me why I must go to the Portage | team for a change, when it's the QA team demanding change? As the QA | team wants the change, why don't you go to the Portage team and ask | them to implement DEST_PREFIX? We don't have a legitimate demonstration package, and we're not going to go and ask the Portage team to make code changes to support hypothetical speculation. You're the only one with a test case here. | > | The issue at hand is that the QA team is, in this case, repeatedly | > | asking for something it doesn't have the authority to insist on. | > | I also think you're being unreasonable in this specific case. | > | > We're asking you to work with us in fixing a tree breakage. That's | > our goal here. We can't do this if you just go around closing off | > bugs and refusing to cooperate. | | Please stop spreading FUD, and libelling my name here. You've closed that bug five times now without fixing it. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Wearer of the shiny hat) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
