1 |
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> Seems like none of you ever bothered to read the bug about pngcrush |
3 |
> and what was discussed there. |
4 |
|
5 |
I read the entire discussion before making a single post - it would be |
6 |
irresponsible not to. Now, I can't say that I checked the cvs |
7 |
histories of the package metadata.xml file, the herd memberships, or |
8 |
what somebody sent to somebody else in IRC. |
9 |
|
10 |
If somebody had posted in the bug a month ago "FYI - I plan to mask |
11 |
this package on $date so if you have a problem with that let me know," |
12 |
I doubt we'd be having this conversation at all. |
13 |
|
14 |
> It is getting a little bit of a habit to escalate minor problems to flames in Gentoo. |
15 |
|
16 |
Obviously Matt was unhappy with how things were handled. It would be |
17 |
best if he tried to work that out in private first, and perhaps |
18 |
efforts were made to do this, and perhaps not. |
19 |
|
20 |
However, I think the reason everybody and their uncle is posting here |
21 |
is that there doesn't seem to be any acknowledgment that something |
22 |
non-ideal was done here in the first place. That just means that this |
23 |
whole thing could happen again. |
24 |
|
25 |
Arguing over who did what is counterproductive in my mind - this isn't |
26 |
a forum to seek justice. However, talking about how the process |
27 |
SHOULD work is productive, and I'd just ask that in the future that |
28 |
people publicly disclose in advance what they plan to do when it |
29 |
involves touching packages that others maintain. If somebody can't |
30 |
come to an agreement with the maintainer on how something should be |
31 |
handled the solution is to escalate within the project(s) first as |
32 |
appropriate, but not to just go around doing cvs commits. |
33 |
|
34 |
I'm fine with having a bias for action, and assuming no response in |
35 |
two weeks means somebody is OK with something. However, logging a bug |
36 |
reporting an issue isn't really the same as asking for consent to mask |
37 |
a package. If a package has a critical security problem then we may |
38 |
not be able to wait, but nobody is going to die if a libpng |
39 |
stabilization is delayed by a week or two, and if this were started a |
40 |
week or two earlier there would be no debate here. Or, at least if |
41 |
there were a debate there would be less of an aggrieved feeling. |
42 |
|
43 |
In any case, if you don't want to see flame-wars on -dev I'd recommend |
44 |
starting by not doing things that are likely to tick people off - like |
45 |
committing to somebody else's package without ensuring they know about |
46 |
it. It sounds like there was an irc ping in this case, but I don't |
47 |
consider those a very reliable form of communication - especially if |
48 |
it is not acknowledged. |
49 |
|
50 |
Rich |