On 11/30/2010 04:02 PM, ext Carsten Munk wrote:
2010/11/30 Carsten Munk<[email protected]>:
I think one reason is that there has to have been a problem in the
MeeGo stack for it to be accepted in. I mean, if a bug manifests on
(wild example) Debian on SPARC but not in MeeGo, why should that be a
reason for a package update alone?
That got cut a little short.. One relevant question - you have a bugs
component on bugs.meego.com too?. You should ask your users on
internal side to file on meego.com - It's same code tree after all,
same bugs should be valid.
This was discussed a while back on meego-dev (I think). The problem is
that many of the bug reports refer to internal Nokia applications. If
the bug report is e.g. "WhizBang crashes when using
meegotouch-applauncherd", the WhizBang developer would need to create a
publishable test case where the bug manifests itself, which may already
involve a fair amount of investigation. In other words, ain't gonna
happen without quite a bit of external pressure.
One of the underlying problems is that us Nokia folks are not treated as
proper upstream. There is an expectation that as we do internal
releasing we should alos keep our components in the MeeGo stack up to
date. However, when we try to update the MeeGo packaging, there is a lot
of huffing and puffing about missing BMC numbers.
If it was up to me, I would immediately stop trying to work in push
mode. If there are no open bugs at BMC for us, then clearly MeeGo stack
users are happy with what they have.
--
Pertti
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-packaging mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-packaging
