[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Non-responsive maintainer process for Damien Durand

On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 16:34:45 +0530, Rakesh wrote:

> But what prevents one to assigning bugs to himself before fixing it
> and doing the build after commits? Not even importing the source for
> which fix was done ? why half work ?

Can't answer that and don't want to guess. ;)

Let me point out the following, though:

This would be less of an issue, if the package had a maintainer instead of
a non-responsive one.

The FTBFS issue was reported on 2008-02-22 for a package with a Fedora 6
tag. The incomplete commit to fix it was done seven months later. The
ticket - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/434529 - was closed prior to 
waiting for the build results. Nobody has verified this, nobody
has reopened it. Yes, one can see the source tarball was missing.

The FTBFS issue was reported _another_ time for the same package id
on 2008-10-01 in a _new_ ticket: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/465075
That's the one you refer to.

Still, cvs commits can be completely unrelated to any open bugzilla
tickets. That's why it is important to be careful when committing changes
and not to ignore cvs' warnings about working-copies of files being older
than files in the cvs repository. It is really bad to not examine the
diffs painstakingly, but simply force changes into the repository.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]