| 1 |
Bernd Steinhauser wrote: |
| 2 |
> Luca Barbato schrieb: |
| 3 |
>> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> The point is to make pkgcore a better package manager by getting the |
| 5 |
>>> developers to do some basic testing. We're not talking some obscure, |
| 6 |
>>> weird bug here. We're talking a really obvious, major screwup that a |
| 7 |
>>> couple of quick unit tests would catch straight away. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> No, you aren't talking, you are babbling about undefined flaws that |
| 10 |
>> nobody can evaluate, for which you aren't providing a way to |
| 11 |
>> reproduce it and possibly doesn't exist. |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> lu |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
> So in your opinion, the pkgcore maintainers should just say "Screw it, |
| 16 |
> it was just Ciaran who said that." and move on? |
| 17 |
No, it's just unsubstantiated rumors. As such they are irrelevant until |
| 18 |
some kind of proof is shown. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Why is "Create tests for EAPI=1 stuff." not a way to describe how to |
| 21 |
> reproduce a problem? |
| 22 |
It is too generic and doesn't even describe the class of bug. By the |
| 23 |
same rationale portage and paludis have multiple bugs ... |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> Talking away problems, now that is a way to handle QA. |
| 26 |
So, could anyone just actually mention what the problem is, or is the |
| 27 |
hivemind not able to express such a simple thing? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Just think of the thousands of emails, being read by hundreds of |
| 30 |
readers, that have cost so much time ... in that time you could have |
| 31 |
written a patch and a bugreport. |
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives