On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 15:19 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 09:48 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > > 1. How the hell should I, as the packager, know this? > > If you aren't capable of working it out, you really aren't the kind of > person who should be maintaining packages yet, until you've learned > more. Thl keeps setting himself forward as an example of a > non-programmer packager, but 'even' he is capable of basic stuff like > that. I disagree - a lot of software has seldom-used network support that I may never encounter just b/c I happen to package it up. > > 2. I don't have access to any ipv6 networks - how and WHY should I > > test this? > > Utter crap. Everyone has access to IPv6 networks -- it's trivial, even > in the US. Well, if I do I don't know how to access it and I'm not overly-inspired to learn about it right now. > > > 3. why is it my responsibility to document this > > Because we expect a certain level of quality from Fedora packages -- or > at least I thought we did. I _thought_ we'd decided that Fedora Extras > wasn't going to just be a random second-rate dumping ground for crap, > but it was going to aspire to follow the same goals and achieve the same > quality as Fedora Core. There are goals and quality in core?? News to me - I thought core was just what could get passed jeremy, notting and sopwith. :) > > and clutter up bugzilla? > > 'clutter up bugzilla'? Yeah, right. Now we're just getting silly, aren't > we? no, we started out silly with your first post. :) -sv
