On Monday, 11 July 2016 8:01:30 PM AEST Martín Ferrari wrote:
> > Noted. I'm not against fixing the problem but there are more important
> > issues to prioritise.
> I think this is not a valid argument.

If you believe those issues are the most important ones to fix then be my 
guest and start addressing them as a matter of priority. You are welcome to 
work on those issues.

Yet you may notice that those problems are not among ones that seriously  
affect users or other packages hence I don't feel inclined to prioritise 

> Chris is right that the packages
> are not following policy, and that they should be fixed.

Yes, he is right. Your point?

> Packaging all
> the world software does not serve our users if we are not following our
> procedures.

I think understand your implications. I'm doing shitty work, you mean.
May I suggest you to maybe shut up?

> I have seen already a few instances of packages you prepared where you
> just skip the tests, or skip failures, instead of fixing the real
> problems these are covering. This is not good for Debian and it is
> definitely not good for the team.

Thanks for criticism but I really got enough of it from you already.

> Please, reconsider your attitude.

I'd like to recommend you to do the same.
I'm starting to feel pissed off by your rude passive aggressive attitude and 

 Dmitry Smirnov.


The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher
esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.
        -- Friedrich Nietzsche

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list

Reply via email to