On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 01:57:12PM +0000, Roger Leigh wrote: > I don't disagree. I would much rather every ubuntu change had a > corresponding patch filed in the BTS,
Every "relevant" change put into the BTS would be nice, yes. Filing everything in the BTS would result in a lot of "patch,wontfix" bugs in some packages. There's also issues with making sure that patches in the BTS don't depend on other patches provided previously, as the longer the packages have been diverging, the more layers-upon-layers of changes will build up. > OTOH, I've seen a number of ubuntu patches which were blatantly wrong, > where the maintainer clearly didn't grok the package they were changing. *This* irritates me mightily. The reason, as given by a MOTU when I asked about why a change was made in a fairly substandard manner, was "there aren't enough MOTUs to do all the work, so we don't have time to understand the package, we can only fix the immediate problem". (Paraphrased, but I can dig up the exact conversation from my (public channel) IRC log if anyone thinks I've given a wrong impression). There's "I screwed up because I made a mistake", and there's "I screwed up because I don't actually know what I'm doing", but "I screwed up because I didn't care about doing a quality job" is on a whole other level. - Matt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
