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 them. > 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 nitpicking... -- Regards, 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
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list Pkgemail@example.com http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers