On 12/17/2016 08:22 AM, Ben Finney wrote: > On 15-Dec-2016, Loic Dachary wrote: > >> On 12/15/2016 11:09 AM, Ben Finney wrote: > >>> So we'll need to seek another solution. I think correct solutions >>> would include: >>> >>> * Remove the dependency. If the state of that code is as bad as >>> you say, this would be a good option; I hope we'll find that >>> it's not as dire as you portray above. >>> >>> * Make the dependency optional. This is recorded in the >>> Coverage.py issue tracker >>> <URL:https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/279/>. >>> >>> * Bring Coverage.py forward to use the latest API for >>> ‘jquery.hotkeys’. >>> >>> There may be other options. What are your thoughts? >> >> The better option would be to have automated tests verifying the >> differences between the upstream files and the dependencies do not >> introduce regressions or behavior changes. > > That's a good suggestion. > > Even with that, though, we would still have no resolution to the bug > you've reported. Can you speak to what resolution you expect? One of > the ones I listed above, or something else?
I expressed, as clearly as I could, what is at stake. Not only for this dependency but also for other dependencies. I trust you will decide for a solution that preserves the integrity of the software as well as the Debian policy. Thanks ! -- Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
