| 1 |
Stephen P. Becker wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Alin Nastac wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> I didn't dropped any keywords yet but I've been pretty close to that. |
| 6 |
>> See http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=81702 for more info. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Congratulations, you just took something that pissed you off |
| 10 |
> personally and threw it up on the dev mailing list for the purpose of |
| 11 |
> attempting to make a point where there is none. Never mind that for |
| 12 |
> well over a week, you joined #gentoo-mips at least 6 hours before any |
| 13 |
> of us in there would even be awake, said only "mips team ping", and |
| 14 |
> then logged off 5 minutes later. You should have at least talked |
| 15 |
> directly to somebody before getting so pissed off. Remember, when |
| 16 |
> *you* want something, *we're* not likely to come track you down. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
Ok, I could understand that none of the mips team are online when I |
| 19 |
want, but how about the bug mentioned above? One month I |
| 20 |
waited/begged/threat!!! For what? For some lousy script updates, which |
| 21 |
is not arch dependent anyway! |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
>> C'mon people, how hard can it be to see if it builds right on your arch? |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> So you are suggesting that we should mark something stable if it |
| 28 |
> simply compiles? I really hope you don't apply this lazy method of QA |
| 29 |
> to everything you maintain, else I fear for the users installing those |
| 30 |
> packages. This is the main reason we didn't touch that package, |
| 31 |
> because none of us had the ability to test pppoe. If you had actually |
| 32 |
> made an attempt to talk to one of us when we were awake before running |
| 33 |
> your mouth, you would have known this. In fact, we probably would |
| 34 |
> have just given you permission to remove the keyword assuming that no |
| 35 |
> repoman breakage resulted. |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
Not every package that I maintain is tested by me! How can I test a dsl |
| 38 |
driver when I have no such device! |
| 39 |
I apply the good old rule that if a package has no open bugs for a |
| 40 |
month, it will be marked as stable. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
If I would do things you way, in this moment net-dialup would have at |
| 43 |
least 100 opened bugs with no one carrying about them. I urge you to |
| 44 |
look in bugzilla to see how many rightfully complaints are there |
| 45 |
regarding my work. Not as if I consider less about a dev who made a |
| 46 |
mistake (only who do nothing, does no mistakes)... |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
It is OK to want to make more than a simple compile test, but from this |
| 49 |
to doing nothing when a fellow dev ask you to IS a big distance! A |
| 50 |
convenient excuse, nothing more... |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
I didn't wanted to get so involved in this bug, but invalid bug reports |
| 53 |
started by the transition from -r2 are killing me. In rest, what do I |
| 54 |
care that your arch is outdated! |
Archives