On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 03:07:58PM -0400, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 07:31:13PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > > Those cases can be treated differently than failures due to other > > > reasons, though. > > Uh, yes; and they are. But that's not the point. > > > > The point really is that build failures rarely need maintainer > > intervention. Bothering the maintainer with things that do not concern > > them, therefore, seems of little point to me. > > I try to rephrase my point. If build failures which do not concern > maintainers can be distinguished from failures that do concern them, > then we can mail maintainers only about the latter, avoiding bothering > them with the former.
That's why we have FTBFS bugs. -- Fun will now commence -- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
