On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 12:45:56 +0800 Patrick Lauer <patr...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 11/20/12 21:57, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 09:10:51 +0000 (UTC) > > "Patrick Lauer (patrick)" <patr...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > >> patrick 12/11/16 09:10:51 > >> > >> Modified: ChangeLog > >> Added: lyx-2.0.5.ebuild > >> Log: > >> Bump > >> > > > > > > > > While the bump was fine, please read the damn metadata.xml when you > > touch a package you're not used to. Pavel has been doing a very good > > job in (proxy) maintaining lyx since years and you do not seem to have > > contacted him before doing the bump, which is a bit disrespectful for > > him IMHO. > > I disagree. A fix is a fix, a bump is a bump, no ego involved. And how much do you know about the particular package in question? Did you grep through open bugs before bumping it? How many configurations did you test? How many considerations did you make? Did you add yourself to maintainers or grepped bugzie for the next few days? > > If you want to help in having things done quicker because I'm not > > always responsive enough, then please do it correctly and ask Pavel to > > CC you when he sends me instructions for lyx. > I dislike this territorialism. Why add a single point of failure to > package maintenance? (What if you or Pavel "disappear" for any reason?) Are you saying that multiple points of failure are better? I believe in package maintenance and *responsibility*. What responsibility are you taking when you take someone's package and silently modify it? People aren't really required to keep track of your actions and check whether you just didn't introduce something awful to our users. That said, maintainers usually know more about the package in question than you do. The maintainers may be aware of awful bugs which you missed and which are the reason for not bumping the package. If that's the case, your 'trivial bump' may have just unleashed destructive issues for our users. Moreover, the maintainers may have a few changes stashed for the next bump to avoid people rebuilding the package unnecessarily. If that's the case, you are either forcing a second rebuild for our users (through requiring the maintainer to go with a revbump) or delaying those changes even more. One way or the other, our users lose thanks to you. That said, I believe that a dev disappearing and delaying the bump for a few days is not something tragic. Of course, unless security issues show up but these can't be solved cleanly with a bump anyway if it's a stable package. What is much worse, a single impatient developer bumping a package and taking no responsibility for it. Now imagine that your bump could have caused serious issues. These issues were reported quickly to bugzilla but since the actual maintainer was away, nobody noticed them. And I think I've said something similar already. Simply said, these are a few Gentoo developers who take their work seriously. Try to respect that. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
