Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Mon, 06 Aug 2007 20:23:11 -0400:
> we're not talking developers, we're talking users. it's inappropriate > for a user to have spent significant time compiling a package only to > have it fail because TODO does not exist. Isn't the point, however, that if it's a die if the do* is on a file that no longer exists, the maintainer will see it when they test, take care of it, and as a result, it shouldn't ever hit the user? If the maintainer sees it, they can either investigate, if the judge it worth it, or simply kill the do* in question. If the user sees it, it means the maintainer failed to do his job. The tarball couldn't have even been changed upstream without notice, since it'd then fail the sanity/security/signing checks. I think that's the suggestion, that it be mandatory for maintainers to deal with, and the user shouldn't ever see it. (Or alternatively, if the user doesn't see the file and thus ends up with the error after it checked out fine by the maintainer, then the user's system is screwed up to the point where a die is probably safest in any case, so it's the right thing to do.) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
