On Fri, 13 Jun 2025 10:06:30 +0000 Holger Levsen <hol...@layer-acht.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 02:42:33PM -0700, Soren Stoutner wrote: > > I would recommend you first create a bug and an associated MR. > > Then, if you get no response (which is obviously different than a > > NACK), you can choose if you would like to salvage the package or > > if you would like to leave the MR there for someone else who to to > > come along and salvage the package. > > https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/raspi-firmware doesnt give any > indication to me that the package is ripe for salvaging it. Hijacking > it you could, but you should not. > > Please don´t give bad advice on -devel. > > (The bug in question is wishlist and merely asks for a new way to > boot raspis giving some hints how this could be implemented but does > not contain a patch, but rather explains how there are two unsolved > problems with that suggestion Not quite, it explains why it is my solution doesn't just work with the existing package and why a patch (which I offer to implement) is needed. > and finally the bug is from end of April 2025 when the freeze was > already quite far advanced, so no wonder there was no reply.) That's a good point, I hadn't thought about freeze timing in relation to maintainer responsiveness. Still, I would have hoped for something along the lines of "This looks good, let's wait until after the freeze to do this", "I'm concerned about XYZ but otherwise this seems like a good idea", or even "I hate everything about this, what on earth are you doing?! If you really need X so badly, do it this way", despite the freeze, simply since that's what I'm used to from other maintainers in Debian that I've worked with. Near-total silence when contacted in three different ways feels like inactivity or at least low availability to me. Maybe my experiences with those other maintainers are the exception and not the rule though. (I've been an unresponsive maintainer before sadly, but that was because the darn bug mail system wasn't telling me when people reported bugs to me.) > I forgot another important reason why suggesting to salvage was a > really bad advice here: there was only one single mail to the bug, > not even just two, but just one. So it´s really premature to suggest > anything except please mail the bug again, probably with more info. What more info do you believe the bug could use? If I left something out, I'd love to know what, but I think all of the info is there except for a patch, and as I've explained above I was hoping for some feedback of some sort before sending a patch. Sending a second email to the bug is a good idea in general, but do keep in mind I reached out in four different locations with some time between some of the messages, so while there may only be one bug email, I did try more than once to reach the maintainer about this. Best regards, Aaron
pgpFw5QmioHmJ.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
