Hello Andreas Henriksson, On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 05:35:35PM +0200, Andreas Henriksson wrote: > Hello Helge Kreutzmann, > > Sorry if my comments sounded too negative, some more reasoning below.
No problem.
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 04:35:47PM +0200, Helge Kreutzmann wrote:
> > Hello Andreas Henriksson,
> > I'm a bit puzzled by your e-mail. Simon asked me to provide some text,
> > Chris prodded me and Davide and Simon reviewed my text (which does not
> > imply that it is perfect or so).
> [...]
> > Well, I think for _Debian_ users the change *is* suprising, but only
> > because the su version (and its configuration / behaviour) has
> > changed.
> [...]
>
> If the change in behaviour isn't something we can just live with
> I think solving it via pam configuration seems like the best course
> of action. Please see the mail I just quickly banged together and
> sent to debian-devel (with you BCCed).
Yes, I read it. Thanks for letting me know.
> [...]
> > Which is clearly not the case here. So upstreaming is no option.
>
> Carrying patches downstream forever isn't something I'm very
Not forever: Only until the next stable release has happend. Then drop
it again. Clear timeline.
> enthusiastic about as you probably understand. As you might have
> also noticed I've removed myself from util-linux maintenance (lack of
No, I've not researched about util-linux any further, I just stumbled
over the bug and wanted to add my few cents to help resolving it. I
belive writing patches is better than simply complaining, and for
documentation this is within my skill set.
> time). I thus don't really see it suitable for me to add patches like
> this that someone else gets to maintain, but anyone with upload
> privilegies can upload a NMU themselves ofcourse! (so there's no need
> to wait for me to do it.)
Hopfeully your successor can chime in and put his/her POV on this.
> OTOH please consider I've spent years to back util-linux out of the
> corner it was stuck in. Non upstreamed/upstreamable patches was part
> of the problem. I would very much appreciate some sympathy on that
> rather than pushing things back into the corner as soon as I turn my
> back. ;P
Thanks for your efforts. And I perfectly understand that you want to
avoid (ongoing) distribution specific patches where possible.
> [...]
> > Thanks. But as stated earlier, having it in NEWS is only part of the
> > solution, [...]
>
> I'd even call it a workaround which simply serves the purpose of me
> not having to touch the pam configuration with zero peer review.
> (And I also doubt more people read manpages than read NEWS. Targeting
> release notes might be a much better option. Things that aren't new
> but just best practises we want to spread the knowledge of might be
> better suited for debian-handbook or similar....)
And again who reads the release notes, especially ordinary users who
(like me at work) simply get a system delivered, without any further
"changelog", "NEWS", "release information"? There is no perfect
solution. So besides the NEWs file you mentioned, the other two
options could work in parallel.
[...]
> Sorry for sending another sloppy mail today, but hopefully you can
> make some sense of what I wrote. Really need to attend personal
> things now instead.... Final words, don't expect me to actually maintain
> util-linux anymore. Don't wait for me to upload what you think is
> sensible.
I wish you good success to your personal endavours and thanks for the time
you invested in Debian.
I'm not going to do an NMU for a documentation patch, so let's wait
for your sucessor.
(For me the bug is solved, this bug report is just about spreading the
word appropriately).
Greetings
Helge
--
Dr. Helge Kreutzmann deb...@helgefjell.de
Dipl.-Phys. http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php
64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred
Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
