Re: [gentoo-dev] QA is unimportant?

[Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1510 bytes --]

On Monday 09 November 2009 11:30:27 Patrick Lauer wrote:
> And instead of being happy that people like ssuominen just fix things where
> other people don't (be it because these other people have no interest, only
> care about a few packages or have become distracted with life) some people
>  get really confused and start working on demotivating us.

oh muffin !  get over it already.  either do it right or stop doing it.

> You should understand one thing: I don't care at all about most packages.

then let them die.

>  I'm handling virtualbox because right now jokey doesn't seem to have the
>  time.

jokey hasnt been doing virtualbox in a long time either.  it's been proxy 
maintained.  i know because i was fixing things for a while too.

> So find me a dozen recruits that can properly maintain things and I won't
>  feel the need to touch random packages. Stop living in your sandbox and
>  have a look at the bigger picture :)

we are looking at the bigger picture.  everything in the tree is an example 
for people.  if you throw crap in, people think crap is acceptable and will 
base their work on it.

> (Btw, I wonder how many bugs glibc-2.11 will bring. We'll just let users
> discover them. I love that QA!)

hmm, let's see, one package that was already broken under other C libraries 
broke under glibc-2.11.  and it's already been fixed.  of course, if you'd 
simply used bugzilla's search function, you wouldnt have to rhetorically 
wonder aloud.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]