> You've just offended three people without knowing anything about them. No. I am just describing the current QA procedure. The +1 comments from three people are seen as some kind of proof of stability of the update, and those commenters don't go through any screening of any manner. "Works for me" really is a common expression in those comments. That we often don't know anything about those random people that happen to comment the update and still trust their word *is* a part of the problem. You should understand that falsely accusing people of insults isn't in any way respectful either. > Please do not assume that every maintainer knows everything about their package(s). How putting words into my mouth is "respectful"? > If you (think you) know better than the current maintainer, do offer to help instead of criticizing. I'm sure it'll be appreciated. I am helping. Without me investigating and reporting the problem, the package in question would maybe still be broken. But I am just one person with many things to do and cannot bend myself to substitute a whole QA system. But I have to agree in that the current situation can sometimes except the maintainer to know everything about their package, and such exceptation is unrealistic. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
