|
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > May 2005 > Dear Adrian Bunk, Please hold off a week or two
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Dear Adrian Bunk, Please hold off a week or two
|
|
| Simon Huggins 2005-05-30, 7:53 am |
| Adrian, I've noticed lately that almost every post you send is about the
release; Pointing out problems with some feature or other of it or with
the actions of the hard working people who are trying to get sarge out
the door.
Do you think you could manage to leave your critisms til next week when
we might have released and turn them into constructive criticisms
instead of merely demanding pieces of information from the release team?
I don't know what you hope to achieve by doing this. "Never attribute
to malice what can be explained by ignorance". Maybe you just don't
realise that you're pestering the release team and others and drawing
them into pointless debates which won't help release sarge.
I'd like to ask you publically to hold off for a couple of weeks with
these questions. I'm sure you have an entirely rational reason for
asking them and that it will end up being productive for Debian but I
honestly think it would be better if they were asked later on. A
post-mortem of this release in order to better prepare for Etch might
indeed help us and I can only imagine you're itching to write it given
the number of questions you've asked.
Once sarge releases I'm sure there'll be plenty of time to talk about
how to get a quicker, predictable release schedule for Etch.
Thanks,
--
,--huggie-at-earth-dot-li--------stuff-thing-stuff----------DF5CE2B4--.
_| "1 girl was just abducted." - Mulder "Kidnapped." - Scully |_
| "Potato, potato.." - Mulder |
`- http://www.earth.li/~huggie/ - http://www.blackcatnetworks.co.uk/ -'
| |
| Adrian Bunk 2005-05-30, 5:52 pm |
| On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 12:17:29PM +0100, Simon Huggins wrote:
> Adrian, I've noticed lately that almost every post you send is about the
> release; Pointing out problems with some feature or other of it or with
> the actions of the hard working people who are trying to get sarge out
> the door.
>
> Do you think you could manage to leave your critisms til next week when
> we might have released and turn them into constructive criticisms
> instead of merely demanding pieces of information from the release team?
>
> I don't know what you hope to achieve by doing this. "Never attribute
> to malice what can be explained by ignorance". Maybe you just don't
> realise that you're pestering the release team and others and drawing
> them into pointless debates which won't help release sarge.
>
> I'd like to ask you publically to hold off for a couple of weeks with
> these questions. I'm sure you have an entirely rational reason for
> asking them and that it will end up being productive for Debian but I
> honestly think it would be better if they were asked later on. A
> post-mortem of this release in order to better prepare for Etch might
> indeed help us and I can only imagine you're itching to write it given
> the number of questions you've asked.
>
> Once sarge releases I'm sure there'll be plenty of time to talk about
> how to get a quicker, predictable release schedule for Etch.
Could you please read and understand the email you are answering to
before sending such emails?
My email was not about the release process for sarge (unless the release
process for sarge will be aborted a third time, there's nothing that can
be changed).
My email was about an issue that is present _now_ and that has to be
attacked _before_ sarge.
Or do you _really_ want to release sarge with many dozens of already
known and fixed bugs?
> Thanks,
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Russ Allbery 2005-05-30, 5:52 pm |
| Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> writes:
> Or do you _really_ want to release sarge with many dozens of already
> known and fixed bugs?
Yes. Given the number of packages in Debian, some amount of this is
inevitable. We'll live.
And you're not just providing constructive feedback. You're also picking
personal fights with the release team and speculating wildly and as
negatively as possible about their motives. Please stop. It's obnoxious,
abusive, and unhelpful.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Steve McIntyre 2005-05-30, 5:52 pm |
| Russ Allbery wrote:
>Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> writes:
>
>
>Yes. Given the number of packages in Debian, some amount of this is
>inevitable. We'll live.
>
>And you're not just providing constructive feedback. You're also picking
>personal fights with the release team and speculating wildly and as
>negatively as possible about their motives. Please stop. It's obnoxious,
>abusive, and unhelpful.
Seconded.
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com
"I can't ever sleep on planes ... call it irrational if you like, but I'm
afraid I'll miss my stop" -- Vivek Dasmohapatra
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Bernd Eckenfels 2005-05-30, 5:52 pm |
| In article <20050530111729.GL1707@paranoidfreak.co.uk> you wrote:
> Do you think you could manage to leave your critisms til next week when
> we might have released and turn them into constructive criticisms
> instead of merely demanding pieces of information from the release team?
He is warning about a big number of onresolved RC Bugs which will look to
users like regression. It is not unreasonable to at least address this issue
in the Release not (because personally I dont expect a Bug-Free Release).
> I don't know what you hope to achieve by doing this. "Never attribute
> to malice what can be explained by ignorance". Maybe you just don't
> realise that you're pestering the release team and others and drawing
> them into pointless debates which won't help release sarge.
Actually I am glad somebody is working public visible on the release issues
and would not critisize him for that.
Greetings
Bernd
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Joey Hess 2005-05-30, 5:52 pm |
| Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Or do you _really_ want to release sarge with many dozens of already
> known and fixed bugs?
I'd worry about it more if we hadn't suffered from the same or similar
problems with ever previous Debian release, TBPH. Even back when we froze
unstable, this just pushed certian bugfixes out of the archive entirely.
As long as we do a little better each release, the sky is not falling in
my part of the world.
--
see shy jo
| |
| Miles Bader 2005-05-30, 8:48 pm |
| Bernd Eckenfels <ecki@lina.inka.de> writes:
> Actually I am glad somebody is working public visible on the release issues
> and would not critisize him for that.
Pointing out a problem is nice, but doing so in an obnoxious manner
hurts.
-Miles
--
$B<+$i$r6u$K$7$F!"?4$r3+$/;~!"F;$O3+$+$l$k(B
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Nigel Jones 2005-05-31, 2:48 am |
| I noticed that Adrian moved a bug report for a kernel in sid (2.6.10
IIRC) to the 2.6.8 kernel so it appeared as a Sarge RC Bug? I didn't
see anything that showed that it was a 2.6.8 problem, maybe it is, but
it looked like second guessing to me...
How is this helping Sarge? If it turns out that it does affect part
of Sarge then isn't there a means provided to upload the new .deb
files after release?
Bug in question is #303200, also it seems it was downgraded to a
non-RC bug, so now doesn't that mean that it is now filed in wrong
places?
P.S. Miles: sorry that you'll get it twice, I forgot to check the To: box...
On 31/05/05, Miles Bader <miles@lsi.nec.co.jp> wrote:
> Bernd Eckenfels <ecki@lina.inka.de> writes:
>
> Pointing out a problem is nice, but doing so in an obnoxious manner
> hurts.
>
> -Miles
> --
> $B<+$i$r6u$K$7$F!"?4$r3+$/;~!"F;$O3+$+$l$k(B
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
--
N Jones
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Adrian Bunk 2005-05-31, 7:48 am |
| On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 03:45:07PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> I'd worry about it more if we hadn't suffered from the same or similar
> problems with ever previous Debian release, TBPH. Even back when we froze
> unstable, this just pushed certian bugfixes out of the archive entirely.
>...
How can this happen whenyou freeze unstable?
> see shy jo
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Santiago Vila 2005-05-31, 7:48 am |
| On Tue, 31 May 2005, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 03:45:07PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
>
> How can this happen whenyou freeze unstable?
I guess you will not understand at each other if you use the term
"freezing unstable" with two different meanings. I see that the term
may have at least two meanings:
* "frozen" is created initially as a copy of unstable. After this,
frozen and unstable evolve separately, unless you upload some package
for "frozen unstable", as we did in the old days. I bet Adrian would
not call this a proper freeze of unstable, as it would be the "frozen"
distribution who would be really frozen, not unstable.
* "unstable" is actually frozen, which means uploads for unstable
are either discouraged, they remain in the limbo, or they are automatically
put in some other distribution above unstable, like new-unstable, until
testing or unstable becomes the new stable.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Adrian Bunk 2005-05-31, 7:48 am |
| On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 04:07:11PM +1200, Nigel Jones wrote:
> I noticed that Adrian moved a bug report for a kernel in sid (2.6.10
> IIRC) to the 2.6.8 kernel so it appeared as a Sarge RC Bug? I didn't
> see anything that showed that it was a 2.6.8 problem, maybe it is, but
> it looked like second guessing to me...
The important part of the bug log is the following by one of the Debian
kernel maintainers:
well reiserfs doesn't work well with preempt,
could you please try the 2.6.11 kernel-iamge.
there preempt is disabled afair.
PREEMPT is enabled in both the 2.6.8 and the 2.6.10 kernel images but no
longer in the 2.6.11 kernel images.
It might look like second guessing, but if ReiserFS has problems with
PREEMPT in 2.6.10, the probability that this is also present in 2.6.8 is
quite high.
> How is this helping Sarge? If it turns out that it does affect part
> of Sarge then isn't there a means provided to upload the new .deb
> files after release?
The main question is not when and how to fix such an issue.
The problem is that the release team's scripts to measure their RC bugs
metric can't handle pseudo-packages correctly.
Steve has already acknowledged this limitation (and AFAIK it has yet
to be fixed).
Therefore my reassigning was required to get this bug on the radar of
the release team.
> Bug in question is #303200, also it seems it was downgraded to a
> non-RC bug, so now doesn't that mean that it is now filed in wrong
> places?
>...
The most important thing seems to be the added "moreinfo" tag.
The maintainer know better about such issues than I do.
I do not claim to have been able to reproduce this problem, all I claim
is that if it's a problem (IOW: not a local hardware problem of the
submitter) it's most likely also present in kernel 2.6.8.
And my reassigning was requred to get it on the radar of the release
team.
> N Jones
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Thijs Kinkhorst 2005-05-31, 7:48 am |
| On Tue, May 31, 2005 03:43, Miles Bader wrote:
> Bernd Eckenfels <ecki@lina.inka.de> writes:
>
> Pointing out a problem is nice, but doing so in an obnoxious manner
> hurts.
I would like to add: pointing out a problem is easy, providing good
solutions is a lot harder. Continuously pointing out problems ("the metric
is wrong", "testing is bad") is destructive critisism, while what we
really need is constructive thinking about the issues for etch, after the
release. In the vast majority of his mails I see mr Bunk only hammering on
perceived problems. Very tiring.
Thijs
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Steve Langasek 2005-05-31, 6:04 pm |
| On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 11:22:20AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> The important part of the bug log is the following by one of the Debian
> kernel maintainers:
> well reiserfs doesn't work well with preempt,
> could you please try the 2.6.11 kernel-iamge.
> there preempt is disabled afair.
> PREEMPT is enabled in both the 2.6.8 and the 2.6.10 kernel images but no
> longer in the 2.6.11 kernel images.
> It might look like second guessing, but if ReiserFS has problems with
> PREEMPT in 2.6.10, the probability that this is also present in 2.6.8 is
> quite high.
[vbcol=seagreen]
> The main question is not when and how to fix such an issue.
> The problem is that the release team's scripts to measure their RC bugs
> metric can't handle pseudo-packages correctly.
> Steve has already acknowledged this limitation (and AFAIK it has yet
> to be fixed).
> Therefore my reassigning was required to get this bug on the radar of
> the release team.
Actually, I've started using
lynx -width=160 -dump http://bugs.debian.org/release-critical/other/all.html \
| grep -v '\[[EUS]*X*\]\|I\]\|\[TX\]' | grep -B3 '\[........\]'
as a means of tracking the status of sarge-affecting RC bugs according to
bugs.debian.org.
The diff between this and bts.turmzimmer.net includes two bugs against
packages that are only in non-US; two bugs against installation-reports
which most likely need to be downgraded; one upgrade-reports bug which is
probably unreproducible; one bug on 'kernel' that is probably sarge-ignore
but I haven't looked at it in any detail yet; one unreproducible bug against
"general" which is probably a fixed bug in an old package; and one RC bug
against ftp.debian.org asking for d-i udeb packages to be synced for the
release (95% resolved as far as the release is concerned, current overall
status seen at <http://www.wolffelaar.nl/~jeroen/d-i/sarge-sarge.txt> ).
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
| |
| Andrew Suffield 2005-05-31, 6:04 pm |
| On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 11:36:06AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Tue, May 31, 2005 03:43, Miles Bader wrote:
>
> I would like to add: pointing out a problem is easy, providing good
> solutions is a lot harder. Continuously pointing out problems ("the metric
> is wrong", "testing is bad") is destructive critisism,
There's nothing wrong with destructive criticism. The correct solution
to an activity which is actually bad *is* to destroy it. Some
activities don't need replacing with a more productive one, they just
need eliminating.
Being obnoxious is unproductive, but that's not the annoying thing
here either.
The thing about Bunk which is annoying is the way he is continually
searching for reasons to destroy testing by proving it bad, and
continually *failing*. Not many people would mind if he was actually
right. It's being wrong every time, on a weekly basis (because he has
an axe to grind but no actual point) which annoys people.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
| |
| Russ Allbery 2005-05-31, 8:51 pm |
| Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> writes:
> * "unstable" is actually frozen, which means uploads for unstable are
> either discouraged, they remain in the limbo, or they are automatically
> put in some other distribution above unstable, like new-unstable, until
> testing or unstable becomes the new stable.
At which point there are *still* fixed bugs that don't make it into the
release. They're fixed upstream, fixed in experimental, fixed in private
working repositories that don't get uploaded due to the freeze, etc.
There are also the bugs that people just don't notice.
As near as I can tell (and I've had a package affected by this), the
release team is doing a great job making sure that fixes that they know
about propagate into sarge. There will be fixes they don't know about.
There will be RC bugs found after the release. Debian is just far, far
too large to be able to release a bug-free distribution. This isn't a
serious problem; this is just life. If they're RC and actually
significant (some of the missing dependencies are RC but not really that
important for normal use scenarios), hopefully they can be fixed through
proposed-updates.
Let's not spend a bunch of time fretting about the last 1%. Doing
something reasonable and then going with it will produce results that will
be quite acceptable in practice.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|
|
|
|
|