Re: mis-identification of quotations due to lazy bike-shedding
On 04/25/2013 03:51 PM, Neil Williams wrote: > As with the rest of this ridiculous thread, all the discussion is about > one element of a much larger problem and it was the entirety of the > previous packaging which convinced me that there were only two sane > options for the package: Fix all of the problems or remove the package > entirely. > > I was not seeking removal merely due to this one quoted part of the bug > report. There were other, more serious, issues than this one but nobody > seems to have noticed any of that. I'm quite tired that people tell me I should read the bug report, and make sure I'm aware of things. FYI, I have read the full bug report, and downloaded the package from snapshot.d.o to see what we were talking about. What I found was indeed a package that had lots of hacks in the debian/rules, but at the same time, absolutely all hacks where carefully commented with the dh_* equivalent. In fact, I found it very interesting to read, quite fun, and probably a good thing to show to newbies so that they understand what's behind the dh automagic "deliberate obfuscation". :) > The bug is now fixed, the package wasn't removed, I will not reply to > any messages relating to it or this bike-shedding thread either on or > off list. Anyone who perpetuates this sub-thread invites the moniker of > "troll" - unless posting entirely in fun. Sure, let's move on... Thomas -- 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/517999c9.7070...@debian.org
Re: mis-identification of quotations due to lazy bike-shedding
On 04/25/2013 03:51 PM, Neil Williams wrote: > On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 07:08:48 +0800 > Thomas Goirand wrote: > >> On 04/25/2013 01:52 AM, Neil McGovern wrote: >>> Perhaps you should go read the bug report first. As you seem to be >>> unwilling to actually do research, I'll include the relevant section for >>> your benefit: >> When you write: > This will be my only reply to this particular bike-shed. > > Thomas: Read the bug report. I filed it. Neil McGovern quoted it. I > wrote the comments as part of a wider critique of the package. You are > replying to Neil McGovern as if he wrote it. Sorry for the confusion. You have my apologies, if you can accept them. Thomas -- 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/517995ef.3050...@debian.org
Re: mis-identification of quotations due to lazy bike-shedding
* Neil Williams , 2013-04-25, 08:51: Perhaps you should go read the bug report first. As you seem to be unwilling to actually do research, I'll include the relevant section for your benefit: When you write: This will be my only reply to this particular bike-shed. Thomas: Read the bug report. I filed it. Neil McGovern quoted it. [snip - pointless scoffing] Shit happens. It's not the first time somebody confuses you two[0], probably not the last. Making song and dance about it was uncalled-for. I was not seeking removal merely due to this one quoted part of the bug report. There were other, more serious, issues than this one but nobody seems to have noticed any of that. Sorry, it's hard to tell which issues are more serious when they are all wishlist. Anyone who perpetuates this sub-thread invites the moniker of "troll" - unless posting entirely in fun. [The things I wrote above were not for fun, but these below are. Do I still qualify as a troll?] Don't dare to reply if you disagree with me! [0] http://lists.debian.org/87lixoz9c6@mirexpress.internal.placard.fr.eu.org -- Jakub Wilk -- 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/20130425104636.ga6...@jwilk.net
mis-identification of quotations due to lazy bike-shedding
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 07:08:48 +0800 Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 04/25/2013 01:52 AM, Neil McGovern wrote: > > Perhaps you should go read the bug report first. As you seem to be > > unwilling to actually do research, I'll include the relevant section for > > your benefit: > > When you write: This will be my only reply to this particular bike-shed. Thomas: Read the bug report. I filed it. Neil McGovern quoted it. I wrote the comments as part of a wider critique of the package. You are replying to Neil McGovern as if he wrote it. Yes, I know, maybe it's too difficult for some of the contributors to this petulant thread to understand but we're both called Neil, we're both currently based in the UK, still most people can actually tell us apart, even after several beers. The different @d.o email address is probably a clue. The different family name is a big fat clue. Maybe attributing something to you originally written by the Reverend Awdry would make the point... Thomas said: "Little Engines can do big things, especially when they have nice blue paint like me." Now which Thomas might that be again? > > That cannot be guaranteed - at some point, someone else is going to > > need to work on pax. The build system is non-standard and not well > > tested because it's restricted to only two packages. > > > > If that turns out to be me, I will RM. I'm not going to spend time on > > the current insanity. > > then I don't agree, and I don't support such decision. The decision didn't need your support and I stand by it. As with the rest of this ridiculous thread, all the discussion is about one element of a much larger problem and it was the entirety of the previous packaging which convinced me that there were only two sane options for the package: Fix all of the problems or remove the package entirely. I was not seeking removal merely due to this one quoted part of the bug report. There were other, more serious, issues than this one but nobody seems to have noticed any of that. I think it is entirely appropriate to remove insane packages from Debian - it raises the quality of Debian as a whole. The bug is now fixed, the package wasn't removed, I will not reply to any messages relating to it or this bike-shedding thread either on or off list. Anyone who perpetuates this sub-thread invites the moniker of "troll" - unless posting entirely in fun. Move on now, get some real work done, it's more fun. PLEASE? -- Neil Williams = http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ pgpdc4A_fHEoM.pgp Description: PGP signature
