Re: [sylpheed:37255] Re: Debian 12 released with two RC bugs in Sylpheed
On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 15:18:57 +0200 José Luis González wrote: > I found the report now. It's #1036799. Yes, it looks like a temporary server issue. And you're sending via gmail now. But again, what do you expect a package maintainer to do? It's upstream where bugs get fixed. Your subject is wrong, your two RC bugs are not RC bugs; in fact, they both seem to be describing the same behaviour, and you are requesting that the behaviour be different. i.e. they are feature requests. The more I consider your complaints about the Debian maintainer, the less they seem to hold water. with regards Paul
Re: Debian 12 released with two RC bugs in Sylpheed
In days of yore (Sun, 07 Apr 2024), José Luis González thus quoth: > Hi, > > Debian 12 was released with two Release Critical bugs I filed on May > 20th 2023 (#1036424 and #1036388) on Sylpheed about issues that I > found on stable, and remain, with Debian 12 released later on June 10th > 2023. So, bug #1036424 is a problem that when you reply to an email, it does not set the From account properly, it uses the default account. That is perhaps a usability defect, but it is not a critical impact defect by any stretch of the imagination. Critical is usually reserved for things like remote exploit, data corruption, or otherwise, you know, critical issues. The other bug, #1036388, has a little more meat on it, but still does not meet the criteria of Critical. Looking at it on the scale of Critical, Important, Medium and Low, I think it warrants Important if I understand the problem description right. Which, correct me if I am wrong, is: - Configure Sylpheed with account A and sender u...@a.com - Configure Sylpheed with additional account B and sender u...@b.com - Account A is default, but we switch to account B for the session. - When a new mail for Account A is received, it is placed in Account B's folders. Okay, that would be an annoying issue. But the bug was addressed. The issue was resolved in Sylpheed 3.8.0~beta1-1. For all I know, the issue was complex and non-trivial to backport to version 3.7.0. I am not the package maintainer, nor the upstream developer, so I am not about to yell at them when they actually produced the fix. To put a perspective on this - I use mutt, with at least four separate email accounts, all receiving email and ultimately pooling into my mailserver. When I send email, I do need to check that I am actually sending as the correct persona as mutt does guess who to send as, but it does not always get it right. Has it led to me sending emails with the wrong sender? Yep. And I apologise when it happens and move on, re-rending with the correct sender. I do not consider this to be a defect in mutt as mutt has never advertised that it will get its guesses of who to send as 100% right when there are more than one account configured as I have it set up. Also - a question that is rhetorical and more food for thought: How much are you paying for your Debian subscription and support per year? -- Kind regards, /S
Re: Debian 12 released with two RC bugs in Sylpheed
On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 13:26:49 +0200 José Luis González wrote: > The maintainer accumulates a lot of bugs for the package, doesn't take > care about almost all, and when I filed a RC bug because the package > became unusable to me he downgraded severity to important claiming it > was just a Gmail issue, when it didn't seem so, even if it was > just happening with Gmail. I wanted to point you to this bug number to > provide records, but couldn't find it neither opened nor archived. The I found the report now. It's #1036799.
Re: [sylpheed:37253] Debian 12 released with two RC bugs in Sylpheed
On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 13:26:49 +0200 José Luis González wrote: > Debian 12 was released with two Release Critical bugs I filed on May > 20th 2023 (#1036424 and #1036388) on Sylpheed about issues that I > found on stable, and remain, with Debian 12 released later on June 10th > 2023. Those are not "Release Critical bugs". > I want to know why Debian 12 was released with those two Sylpheed RC > bags, report the incident to you all, know what to do with the > maintainer and kindly request that someone better at the job takes over > Sylpheed maintainance, or otherwise I will become a Debian developer > and package it myself. The upstream mailing list is not the place for this Debian discussion. On the one hand you "kindly request" and on the other your hurl unwarranted insults on a public list about the long-term Debian maintainer. Maybe Debian will overlook your behaviour and accept you as a developer, I don't know. with regards Paul
Debian 12 released with two RC bugs in Sylpheed
Hi, Debian 12 was released with two Release Critical bugs I filed on May 20th 2023 (#1036424 and #1036388) on Sylpheed about issues that I found on stable, and remain, with Debian 12 released later on June 10th 2023. The maintainer accumulates a lot of bugs for the package, doesn't take care about almost all, and when I filed a RC bug because the package became unusable to me he downgraded severity to important claiming it was just a Gmail issue, when it didn't seem so, even if it was just happening with Gmail. I wanted to point you to this bug number to provide records, but couldn't find it neither opened nor archived. The supposed solution at the time for it was to upload 3.7.0beta1, when the existing version was 3.6.0, and the issue magically disappeared without explanation from him. I discovered he uploaded later another beta (3.8.0beta1), which was included in Debian 12. As far as I recall, 3.7.0beta1 got into Debian 11. He even claimed at the time that Sylpheed was too old and so troublesome and useless and was considering removing it from Debian just because of that. I want to know why Debian 12 was released with those two Sylpheed RC bags, report the incident to you all, know what to do with the maintainer and kindly request that someone better at the job takes over Sylpheed maintainance, or otherwise I will become a Debian developer and package it myself. There are earlier precedents of me filing a RC bug on Sylpheed, with the bug getting unattended, he raising a bad excuse that it was inexistant, and the package caming up later with a newer version with the issue solved and me making the mistake of thinking I was wrong about the bug existing and needed to be filed, and (me) closed the bug, most likely when it still remained in stable (this I don't remember perfectly at this time). I even have no doubt that what he packaged to stable (bookworm) currently has at least one back door that is not credible at all is in upstream, showing up with the spell checker marking some words in this email as wrong after initially turning up as correctly spelt, namedly "caming" and "mistakingly".
