On Wed, 1 Jul 2009, Radu-Cristian FOTESCU wrote:
My point being: audacious does build, but it has a missing
dependency.
Which still == broken repo.
Sure, but when you started that thread you didn't mention your problem
with the comix package. I was still confused why you would talk about
SRPMs that do not build when audacious was not having this problem.
You were referring the whole time to SRPMs that do not build.
But you never give me an example of one.
On the contrary, I mentioned Comix. But again, I never try the
SRPM, but the SPEC+tarball. Which don't build.
Buildlogs are available from:
http://packages.sw.be/comix/_buildlogs/
I hope you come back and tell me what was your problem.
See, this is why I am not a QA manager anywhere: people would commit
mass suicide under my rule :-)
Maybe the problem is indeed you, and not the repository. You expect
too much from people who volunteer their own time. As I said now
multiple times, unless you are not yourself committed to help,
why expect someone else to do it ?
Because you either do something properly, or don't do it at all.
That's not how Open Source works. I do something "properly" so that it
works well for me. And I provide it hoping that people that have some
other use (or expectations) can help me as well.
You have a different expectation. Either you can help the project, or you
use it as-is, or you don't use it.
For me everyone of those is fine. You choose door 2 and I accept.
Maybe RPMforge should ask for money for those people who expect
more than we offer. But I seriously doubt you would pay for it.
So what we do is best effort, much like any other repository really.
Maybe Ubuntu should ask for money from those people who expect
more than they offer. But would this improve Ubuntu's quality?
I very much doubt it.
That's not the point. If you have problem X with Ubuntu, your only
guarantee to see it fixed is by paying Canonical.
In any other case you can report it or fix it yourself. None of these
options guarantee that it will be fixed in Ubuntu. But fixing it yourself
has the highest probability.
- audacious has a missing dependency (audacious-plugins)
- comix SRPM does not rebuild
That's 2 packages, I think we do quite well if that is it :)
But this is only because I am not crazy enough to try 7,600 packages!
Well, you said it was silly to have 8000 packages, while we should only
provide 400 that worked very well.
I say that you only proved to me that 2 are not working well. I am
unwilling to drop 7600 packages because you report 2 that are broken.
You see the difference :)
Of course if you want to make the case that it is better to focus on
quality it is better to day that 7600 have problems, but you are actually
lying because you only know about 2 broken packages.
Besides we don't have 8000 unique packages, more like 5000 I think. But
that is beside the point.
--
-- dag wieers, dag@xxxxxxxxxx, http://dag.wieers.com/ --
[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
