Re: Bug#679236: O: ckport -- portability analysis and security checking tool
reflum, On Thu, 2012-06-28 at 13:05 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: Philipp Schafft writes (Re: Bug#679236: O: ckport -- portability analysis and security checking tool): On Wed, 2012-06-27 at 22:50 +0200, Thomas Preud'homme wrote: What is the link between celt and ckport? I mean, why does this orphaning message refers (implicitely) to celt? The CELT problem as been fixed. The problem with Ron Lee is that he removed all rdepends on libroar wich makes it useless *AFTER* the CELT problem has been fixed. In fact I know of no problem with libroar wich justify such a step (- removing all rdeps means making it unusable for it's users - no need to skip it anymore). There are *no* open bug reports nor was I informed of any problem using another channel. According to http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=674649 the dependency on celt was removed from libroar on the 6th of June. from libao's changelog (1.1.0-2): * End the grief with roar. Too many people now have been through all the stages of Denial, Anger, Bargaining, and Depression with it, so it's time to accept the only sensible course of direct action that remains to preserve sanity. Closes: #667039 The bug only asks for updating a recommends after transition (SONAME change). This was on the 2nd of June. At this stage, a few weeks before freeze, libao was inheriting the problems of celt via roaraudio. When celt is removed by its maintainer, libao would become uninstallable. Given that you as the roaraudio maintainer had strongly resisted Ron's efforts to fix this in roaraudio, even to the point of objecting to a proposed NMU, Ron had no other real option at that point. The problem was caused by Ron Lee being very late and not informing anybody of what he was doing. Something he always does: wouldn't it be natural to inform maintainers then removing dependencys and requesting other packages to do the same? this includes openal, cmus and ices2 for example. don't know a complet list as Ron is not telling anything... But I thank you very much for suspecting me to break my own package by fully ignoring it. Why not first cosider the positive case: The maintainers working on the problem. That was exactly the case. We checked a lot options and looked up code. Stuff that not happens in BTS and that takes time. Time Ron was not giving us. I do agree that his words were harsh and it would have been better if the changelog entry had been more polite. But I don't think it amounts to hate speech. The hate speech was mostly on IRC and mail. In addition I needed to listen a lot to his hate speach against me on IRC and bugs, Unless you have better examples, you are overreacting. see above. As nobody seemd to be interested in this case I decided to leave the Debian project. I don't see a point in getting flamed for trying my very best to ensure quality of packages just to finally waste my time by other people rendering the packages useless. It is of course always sad to see someone leave. Often in the past we have had people driven out by poor behaviour of other members of the project. But based on what I've seen I don't think that's the case here. The reason I am explaining all this is not to persuade you. I'm explaining it in the hope that others in the project will see what has happened and avoid similar situations in the future. I think it will stop happening then a random person in the project can no longer render weeks of work of other persons perfectly useless. The project should care more for users than internal conflicts like this. My users already asking me (upstream) what happend. I would be glad to spend my time to the Debian project in a useful way. But I don't see how this is given anymore. Also my users complain about the situation and I'm not willing to be the person they make responsible for (because I'm in the maintainer team) packages made perfectly useless by others. PS: Release wasn't helpful in this case as well. They tell me they have no opinion and are not interested in getting this fixed for stable (was asking *before* freeze). I'm not mad on anyone of them personally, just I don't think it is the right way to go. -- Philipp. (Rah of PH2) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#679236: O: ckport -- portability analysis and security checking tool
On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 02:49:54PM +0200, Philipp Schafft wrote: PS: Release wasn't helpful in this case as well. They tell me they have no opinion and are not interested in getting this fixed for stable (was asking *before* freeze). I'm not mad on anyone of them personally, just I don't think it is the right way to go. For avoidance of doubt, the release team as a whole did not say anything of the sort. I personally, and not any other member of the release team gave the opinion that this ongoing argument is not something I wanted to get involved with, and that I would not try to dictate a developer's actions in this way. References can be found in the debian-release archives, http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2012/06/msg00388.html and beyond. Neil signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#679236: O: ckport -- portability analysis and security checking tool
reflum, On Wed, 2012-06-27 at 22:50 +0200, Thomas Preud'homme wrote: Le mercredi 27 juin 2012 22:22:17, Ian Jackson a écrit : Philipp Schafft writes (Bug#679236: O: ckport -- portability analysis and security checking tool): The package as made hardy useful by Ron Lee's personal vendetta against me. I searched a bit and AFAICT this is a reference to these threads: bugs.debian.org/674634 http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2012/06/msg00388.html http://lists.keep-cool.org/pipermail/announce/2012-May/86.html From http://packages.qa.debian.org/c/celt.html I see that Ron Lee is indeed the maintainer of celt. It seems to me from reading these conversations that Ron has no vendetta against you. That kind of accusation is totally inappropriate. Ron does indeed have something against the package celt, and his explanations make perfect sense to me. That is, he appears to be right. He is also doing, AFAICT, the right thing. I think NMUing the rdepends of celt is the right thing to do, if it is necessary. (That is, if they haven't already been updated to turn off celt.) What is the link between celt and ckport? I mean, why does this orphaning message refers (implicitely) to celt? The CELT problem as been fixed. The problem with Ron Lee is that he removed all rdepends on libroar wich makes it useless *AFTER* the CELT problem has been fixed. In fact I know of no problem with libroar wich justify such a step (- removing all rdeps means making it unusable for it's users - no need to skip it anymore). There are *no* open bug reports nor was I informed of any problem using another channel. from libao's changelog (1.1.0-2): * End the grief with roar. Too many people now have been through all the stages of Denial, Anger, Bargaining, and Depression with it, so it's time to accept the only sensible course of direct action that remains to preserve sanity. Closes: #667039 The bug only asks for updating a recommends after transition (SONAME change). I don't see any technical problem in this changelog entry getting fixed. The other rdepends were removed by him in a similar way. Also he didn't even tell us (the maintainer team) about those steps. I found out about this by chance. In addition I needed to listen a lot to his hate speach against me on IRC and bugs, As nobody seemd to be interested in this case I decided to leave the Debian project. I don't see a point in getting flamed for trying my very best to ensure quality of packages just to finally waste my time by other people rendering the packages useless. Anyway, I didn't know this package and it seems interesting. I'd be happy to adopt this package but since I'm quite busy now it wouldn't make any sense to adopt it now. I'll add a bookmark for it and will adopt it in september if nobody does before. Thanks for your interest. :) Best regards, Thomas Preud'homme -- Philipp. (Rah of PH2) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#679236: O: ckport -- portability analysis and security checking tool
Philipp Schafft writes (Re: Bug#679236: O: ckport -- portability analysis and security checking tool): On Wed, 2012-06-27 at 22:50 +0200, Thomas Preud'homme wrote: What is the link between celt and ckport? I mean, why does this orphaning message refers (implicitely) to celt? The CELT problem as been fixed. The problem with Ron Lee is that he removed all rdepends on libroar wich makes it useless *AFTER* the CELT problem has been fixed. In fact I know of no problem with libroar wich justify such a step (- removing all rdeps means making it unusable for it's users - no need to skip it anymore). There are *no* open bug reports nor was I informed of any problem using another channel. According to http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=674649 the dependency on celt was removed from libroar on the 6th of June. from libao's changelog (1.1.0-2): * End the grief with roar. Too many people now have been through all the stages of Denial, Anger, Bargaining, and Depression with it, so it's time to accept the only sensible course of direct action that remains to preserve sanity. Closes: #667039 The bug only asks for updating a recommends after transition (SONAME change). This was on the 2nd of June. At this stage, a few weeks before freeze, libao was inheriting the problems of celt via roaraudio. When celt is removed by its maintainer, libao would become uninstallable. Given that you as the roaraudio maintainer had strongly resisted Ron's efforts to fix this in roaraudio, even to the point of objecting to a proposed NMU, Ron had no other real option at that point. I do agree that his words were harsh and it would have been better if the changelog entry had been more polite. But I don't think it amounts to hate speech. In addition I needed to listen a lot to his hate speach against me on IRC and bugs, Unless you have better examples, you are overreacting. As nobody seemd to be interested in this case I decided to leave the Debian project. I don't see a point in getting flamed for trying my very best to ensure quality of packages just to finally waste my time by other people rendering the packages useless. It is of course always sad to see someone leave. Often in the past we have had people driven out by poor behaviour of other members of the project. But based on what I've seen I don't think that's the case here. The reason I am explaining all this is not to persuade you. I'm explaining it in the hope that others in the project will see what has happened and avoid similar situations in the future. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20460.18584.356680.27...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: Bug#679236: O: ckport -- portability analysis and security checking tool
Philipp Schafft writes (Bug#679236: O: ckport -- portability analysis and security checking tool): The package as made hardy useful by Ron Lee's personal vendetta against me. I searched a bit and AFAICT this is a reference to these threads: bugs.debian.org/674634 http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2012/06/msg00388.html http://lists.keep-cool.org/pipermail/announce/2012-May/86.html From http://packages.qa.debian.org/c/celt.html I see that Ron Lee is indeed the maintainer of celt. It seems to me from reading these conversations that Ron has no vendetta against you. That kind of accusation is totally inappropriate. Ron does indeed have something against the package celt, and his explanations make perfect sense to me. That is, he appears to be right. He is also doing, AFAICT, the right thing. I think NMUing the rdepends of celt is the right thing to do, if it is necessary. (That is, if they haven't already been updated to turn off celt.) Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20459.27513.16145.69...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: Bug#679236: O: ckport -- portability analysis and security checking tool
Le mercredi 27 juin 2012 22:22:17, Ian Jackson a écrit : Philipp Schafft writes (Bug#679236: O: ckport -- portability analysis and security checking tool): The package as made hardy useful by Ron Lee's personal vendetta against me. I searched a bit and AFAICT this is a reference to these threads: bugs.debian.org/674634 http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2012/06/msg00388.html http://lists.keep-cool.org/pipermail/announce/2012-May/86.html From http://packages.qa.debian.org/c/celt.html I see that Ron Lee is indeed the maintainer of celt. It seems to me from reading these conversations that Ron has no vendetta against you. That kind of accusation is totally inappropriate. Ron does indeed have something against the package celt, and his explanations make perfect sense to me. That is, he appears to be right. He is also doing, AFAICT, the right thing. I think NMUing the rdepends of celt is the right thing to do, if it is necessary. (That is, if they haven't already been updated to turn off celt.) What is the link between celt and ckport? I mean, why does this orphaning message refers (implicitely) to celt? Ian. Anyway, I didn't know this package and it seems interesting. I'd be happy to adopt this package but since I'm quite busy now it wouldn't make any sense to adopt it now. I'll add a bookmark for it and will adopt it in september if nobody does before. Best regards, Thomas Preud'homme signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
