* Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-06-03 22:51:16 -0400]:
> Tristan Seligmann wrote:
> > Well, fair enough; I suppose the README.Debian note should not be quite
> > as explicit as I made it. I'm just not very happy with the gratuitous
> > (in my view) change to the upstream tarball, so I wanted to be as clear
> > about it as I could for anyone else wondering why it didn't match the
> > released tarball. If it were up to me, I wouldn't be making this change
> > at all, but it seems the alternative is to release lenny without
> > quodlibet, which is not very satisfactory either.
>
> There has never been a clear explaination in #477454 as to why the bug
> should be considered RC at all, or why, if it is RC, it would require
> modification of the upstream tarball to fix.
The explanation appears to be "because an RM says so"; as far as
modifying the upstream tarball goes, the only way anyone is going to
see the offending code is if they go looking for it. If the objective is
just to avoid casual users from being exposed to it, then nothing needs
to be changed in the first place, so I don't see the point in doing
anything at all in that case.
Am I missing some other rationale here? Unfortunately Andreas Barth has
not yet provided any further clarity on his statement that "the fix is
pretty easy and forward"; CC'ing him again to find out what he meant...
Once again, my personal opinion is that this really shouldn't be such a
big deal that it would prevent the package from releasing as-is with
lenny; the relevant code has already been changed upstream, can't this
bug be left as a non-RC severity and be closed with the next upload of
a new upstream release? I would have just done that anyway, but it seems
the next upstream release is likely to be long after lenny, so this
isn't an option unless the severity of the bug can be downgraded.
> There have been vague mutterings about the content being illegal in
> germany; I've already pointed out in the bug log several other instances
> of personal insults included in Debian packages. If the people who think
> this is illegal in germany, and that Debian should censor such speech
> think this bug is RC, they need to begin a comprensive audit and mass RC
> bug filing on all the other packages too. (They might also find certian
> such insults on the Debian mailing lists..)
I believe the "illegal in Germany" reasoning has already been shot down.
--
mithrandi, i Ainil en-Balandor, a faer Ambar
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
