Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 10:05:00AM -0500, John Goerzen wrote: Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I shouldn't have to add my name to the list of maintainers whose packages should never be NMUd. IS there such a list? I don't think there should be. Yes: http://bugs.debian.net/ It would be nice if this were more widely advertised (for example, it doesn't appear to be linked from http://qa.debian.org/). Such a list isn't going to do much good if nobody knows about it.
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
Steve == Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Steve On 23-Apr-01, 18:52 (CDT), Sean 'Shaleh' Perry Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This would prevent the NMUers from doing things like debhelper/debconfizing packages without the maintainer's consent, as well as keep NMU bugs down. *Violently* agree... Steve Until debhelper/debconf become required, such a substantial Steve modification should be prohibited. Until ... become required... this it *is* prohibited! No need to write it down as policy, I'd say. Bye, J PS: And I'm not even a maintainer ;-) -- Jürgen A. Erhard[EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: (GERMANY) 0721 27326 MARS: http://members.tripod.com/Juergen_Erhard/mars_index.html Perl Programmers are from Mars, Python Programmers are from Yorkshire -- Alex in c.l.py pgpisfX8qETrA.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
* Mark Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] [20010425 13:32]: It would be nice if this were more widely advertised (for example, it doesn't appear to be linked from http://qa.debian.org/). Such a list fixed. -- Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 04:52:08PM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: This would prevent the NMUers from doing things like debhelper/debconfizing packages without the maintainer's consent, as well as keep NMU bugs down. Well, but other problems like broken dependencies on binary packages dont get caught. I would urgendtly vote: NO NMU for non-critical Bugs BEFORE a patch is ignored in the Bug Tracking System for X weeks (x 3) Greetings Bernd -- (OO) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ( .. ) [EMAIL PROTECTED],linux.de,debian.org} http://home.pages.de/~eckes/ o--o *plush* 2048/93600EFD [EMAIL PROTECTED] +497257930613 BE5-RIPE (OO) When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl!
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 04:52:08PM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: So perhaps we need to come up with some more structure for the bug parties. Perhaps the right thing to do is have those involved create diffs of their work and place these in a repository for some group of devels responsible for the party to look at. Once the patch has been approved, a NMU can happen in short order. In that case the right repository could be a bugreport to the package involved. That way the diff submission is guaranteed. If the diff turns out to be defective, then this can be explained in that bugreport, and a corrected diff submitted later -- and the package maintainer gets the warm happy glow of nuclear catastrophe having been avoided. Richard Braakman
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
Hi Richard Braakman schrieb: In that case the right repository could be a bugreport to the package involved. That way the diff submission is guaranteed. I agree with you that _something_ has to be done about catastrophal NMUs, but just stopping to NMU and only submitting diffs, even on packages where it is clear that the maintainer stopped working on them some years ago can't be the solution. [1] I've submitted a handful of diffs and some manpages to packages which where either ignored (without notice) or the maintainer didn't bother to upload at all (for some months that is). I'm glad most Debian developers are more responsive, but such things happen and are most frustrating. [1] check out the changelog of afbackup for example ... ciao, 2ri -- Why is abbreviation such a long word?
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 11:32:42AM +0200, Arthur Korn wrote: Richard Braakman schrieb: In that case the right repository could be a bugreport to the package involved. That way the diff submission is guaranteed. I agree with you that _something_ has to be done about catastrophal NMUs, but just stopping to NMU and only submitting diffs, even on packages where it is clear that the maintainer stopped working on them some years ago can't be the solution. Oh, I didn't mean _only_ sending the diff. It was an addendum to Shaleh's suggestion. The idea is to send the diff, then have someone else look at it, and then do the NMU. I don't think we have to appoint any official diff reviewers, it could be enough to say that the person doing the NMU has to be someone other than the person who prepared the diff. That way you make sure that the package is buildable and the NMU is considered sane by at least two people. Ironically, it won't prevent the problem that sparked this thread, namely a weird build environment on the machine where the NMU is compiled. Why is abbreviation such a long word? So that you can practice on it. Richard Braakman
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 11:07:20AM +0300 , Richard Braakman wrote:
In that case the right repository could be a bugreport to the package
involved. That way the diff submission is guaranteed. If the diff turns
though this doesn't catch broken build environment :(( like XF4.0.3 or
obsolete slang ...
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tv We are debian.org, resistance is futile, you will be apt-get upgraded.
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
On 23-Apr-01, 18:52 (CDT), Sean 'Shaleh' Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This would prevent the NMUers from doing things like debhelper/debconfizing packages without the maintainer's consent, as well as keep NMU bugs down. NMUs should *never* change the build/install process to such an extent. NMUs are for fixing bugs in packages that are not being maintained (perhaps temporarily, while maintainer is on vacation). Until debhelper/debconf become required, such a substantial modification should be prohibited. This isn't a matter of oversight, simply common-sense. If the package has been unmaintained for so long that one person is effectively the full-time maintainer via NMUs, then they need to adopt the package. Steve -- Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read every list I post to.)
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I shouldn't have to add my name to the list of maintainers whose packages should never be NMUd. IS there such a list? I don't think there should be. Yes: http://bugs.debian.net/ The NMU was buggy, but with all due respect it appears that the package had not been updated in a long time before that. The standards-version was really old and you were using pre-FHS path names. Most (all?) of the packages NMUd were ones whose upstream is no longer active, had no (other) serious open bugs, and generally do not need frequent updating. That is not to say that the bugs are trivialized, but as I was setting aside time this week to work on them anyway, a few e-mails that procedure calls for could have prevented a lot of confusion. Again, I'm not ranting that NMUs occured. I'm ranting that they were not done correctly.
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Richard Braakman wrote: Ironically, it won't prevent the problem that sparked this thread, namely a weird build environment on the machine where the NMU is compiled. I would still love to see Source Only uploads becoming the standard way of getting new versions into the archive. yours, peter -- PGP signed and encrypted | .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** messages preferred.| : :' :By professionals, | `. `' for professionals http://www.palfrader.org/ | `-http://www.debian.org/
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Richard Braakman wrote: Oh, I didn't mean _only_ sending the diff. It was an addendum to Shaleh's suggestion. The idea is to send the diff, then have someone else look at it, and then do the NMU. You could just drop the NMUed package into some public space (http://my.home/nmued_package.deb) for the proposed review. That way it'd be even easier for the reviewer to check, extracting the diff'd be trivial, one could even use interdiff to see the differences between NMU and the last official version. *t Tomas Pospisek SourcePole - Linux Open Source Solutions http://sourcepole.ch Elestastrasse 18, 7310 Bad Ragaz, Switzerland Tel: +41 (81) 330 77 11
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 01:31:05PM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote: Ironically, it won't prevent the problem that sparked this thread, namely a weird build environment on the machine where the NMU is compiled. thanks to debootstrap, we no longer have any reason to not have a clean build environment in which to build and test packages. make a chroot, and test your changes inside the chroot. -john
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 10:05:00AM -0500, John Goerzen wrote: Again, I'm not ranting that NMUs occured. I'm ranting that they were not done correctly. Fair enough. It is irresponsible for developers to be using any packages which aren't in the archive to build packages, as happened in this case. It may have happened with the helix gnome stuff too, if I remember correctly. Personally I think the best way to avoid the problem is never to install non-official/pre-release packages. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Personally I think the best way to avoid the problem is never
to install non-official/pre-release packages.
Which is good but then how are you supposed to test them :) Just install
them in a chroot and you won't have to worry about it.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmVHI~} [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
OK, I'm rather annoyed. Recently I'm doing squash bugs on my packages and I have had already THREE that have been broken by NMUs that occured over the past week. Not one of the NMUers mailed me before doing that. Only 1 actually filed a bug with a diff. Let's review, kids: http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-nmu.en.html#s-nmu-guidelines Heed the advice therein: * Don't fix something that's not broken. * E-mail the maintianer. * Send in a patch. * DOUBLE CHECK YOUR PATCH. * Always send a diff -u to the BTS with your changes. Why is this so hard for people? I've so far had two packages rendered uninstallable (one due to building against libraries not in the dist and another due to an OBVIOUS syntax error in postinst) and one rendered unbuildable. Every package I've looked at that has had an NMU in the past week has had a problem. People could have avoided this by following proper procedure; none of these NMUs were even necessary. I wouldn't be so ticked if those doing the NMUs had done so correctly. I shouldn't have to add my name to the list of maintainers whose packages should never be NMUd. I would rather trust in the competance of the Debian developers out there to do things right. Please, reread the information at that URL and double-check your work. -- John
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
I should add: I appreciate the efforts of the QA team and those associated with it. I understand that mistakes happen and everyone is human. I do not gripe about NMUs. I gripe about NMUs done wrongly. Thanks. -- John
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
On 23 Apr 2001, John Goerzen wrote: ... Heed the advice therein: * Don't fix something that's not broken. * E-mail the maintianer. ... In general I do totally agree with you, but I want to add a small addition: A Debian bug-squashing party may involve your packages mail sent some time before a bug squashing party fulfills the E-mail the maintianer. . -- John cu Adrian -- Nicht weil die Dinge schwierig sind wagen wir sie nicht, sondern weil wir sie nicht wagen sind sie schwierig.
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 02:40:30PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote: OK, I'm rather annoyed. Recently I'm doing squash bugs on my packages and I have had already THREE that have been broken by NMUs that occured over the past week. I shouldn't have to add my name to the list of maintainers whose packages should never be NMUd. IS there such a list? I don't think there should be. The NMU was buggy, but with all due respect it appears that the package had not been updated in a long time before that. The standards-version was really old and you were using pre-FHS path names. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
On 23-Apr-01, 17:26 (CDT), Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The NMU was buggy, but with all due respect it appears that the package had not been updated in a long time before that. The standards-version was really old and you were using pre-FHS path names. If the NMUer had followed procedure (attempted to contact maintainer, filed diff in BTS, etc.), this might be a legitimate counter-argument. Given that the bugs being fixed weren't RC, to introduce a new bugs (and not even subtle ones) seems particulary ill-advised. Steve -- Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read every list I post to.)
RE: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
On 23-Apr-2001 John Goerzen wrote: OK, I'm rather annoyed. Recently I'm doing squash bugs on my packages and I have had already THREE that have been broken by NMUs that occured over the past week. So perhaps we need to come up with some more structure for the bug parties. Perhaps the right thing to do is have those involved create diffs of their work and place these in a repository for some group of devels responsible for the party to look at. Once the patch has been approved, a NMU can happen in short order. This would prevent the NMUers from doing things like debhelper/debconfizing packages without the maintainer's consent, as well as keep NMU bugs down.
Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID
You can convince me to stop doing stupid things, but I refuse to stop being stupid. ~ESP -- Evan Prodromou [EMAIL PROTECTED]
