Hello Wouter,
On Fri 08 Apr 2022 at 09:36AM +02, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Given that, in case the dpkg maintainer chooses to remain silent
> again, I believe the only way forward is for the TC to recommend a GR
> under ยง4.2.1 of the consitution.
Perhaps there is some appropriate GR that at some
Hi Helmut,
On Fri, 2022-04-08 at 20:04 +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> We vehemently disagree on how severe those bugs are,
> but at least we've stopped selling them as features it seems.
Could you please give examples where such "selling as a feature"
happened?
Please point to somewhere where
On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 09:39:30AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> It sounds like at least one patch has already been rejected, not with
> comments about the patch needing work (which it absolutely does), but AIUI
> with "usrmerge is broken by design". That seems like sufficient proof that
> the
On April 8, 2022 6:31:27 AM PDT, Wookey wrote:
>If they want to prove that no patches for the current approach will
>ever be accepted, that can only be done by engaging further. Yes it
>will be hard work, but if it's not done we are just stuck.
It sounds like at least one patch has already been
On Fri, 2022-04-08 at 15:56 +0200, Ansgar wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-04-08 at 14:31 +0100, Wookey wrote:
> > At this point I am more disappointed in the people who keep insisting
> > that 'it mostly works' is good enough, than I am in the bloody-minded
> > dpkg-maintainer. Debian is not a 'mostly
On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 02:31:27PM +0100, Wookey wrote:
> On 2022-04-08 09:36 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> >
> > The dpkg maintainer has chosen not to engage with the TC in #994388, and
> > now seems to be actively subverting a validly-made TC decision.
> >
> > I do believe it reasonable to
On Fri, 2022-04-08 at 14:31 +0100, Wookey wrote:
> At this point I am more disappointed in the people who keep insisting
> that 'it mostly works' is good enough, than I am in the bloody-minded
> dpkg-maintainer. Debian is not a 'mostly works' project. We do things
> properly - or at least we used
On 2022-04-08 09:36 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> The dpkg maintainer has chosen not to engage with the TC in #994388, and
> now seems to be actively subverting a validly-made TC decision.
>
> I do believe it reasonable to assume the dpkg maintainer has a point if
> he believes that the
On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 03:41:25AM -0700, Felix Lechner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 1:48 AM Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> >
> > The nuclear option here is obviously to take maintenance of dpkg away
> > from the dpkg maintainer unless and until he decides to follow the
> > rules.
>
> This
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 1:48 AM Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> The nuclear option here is obviously to take maintenance of dpkg away
> from the dpkg maintainer unless and until he decides to follow the
> rules.
This song is for Guillem:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnoX81TC6jk
Kind
On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 01:28:16PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 09:36:21AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > FWIW, I think the TC should punt this bug to a GR.
> >
> > The dpkg maintainer has chosen not to engage with the TC in #994388, and
> > now seems to be
On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 09:36:21AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> FWIW, I think the TC should punt this bug to a GR.
>
> The dpkg maintainer has chosen not to engage with the TC in #994388, and
> now seems to be actively subverting a validly-made TC decision.
>
> I do believe it reasonable to
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 03:14:36PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> It would appear that the situation has deteriorated further. dpkg 1.21.2
> now issues a warning on all merged-usr systems:
>
> Setting up dpkg (1.21.2) ...
> dpkg: warning: System unsupported due to merged-usr-via-aliased-dirs.
13 matches
Mail list logo
