Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529496 --- Comment #50 from Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> 2010-01-13 13:57:10 EST --- (In reply to comment #48) > (In reply to comment #36) > > Why do you have to assume the worst? > As I wrote before: The way this review proceeds speaks for itself. Let's be clear: you are assuming either I don't know what I'm doing here, or I don't care enough to try my own stuff. Either way it's not only a wrong assumption (I did test my stuff), but it's offensive. > > Maybe you should try to think of another > > non-antagonist option (hint: 64). > Pardon? It's a reviewer's job to test your work and to point out your bugs. But that's not what you did; after you pointed out the problem, then you implied I didn't even test my own stuff: that doesn't serve any purpose other than to offend. > If you didn't test on 64bit platforms, this is your fault. If by "test" you mean build, install, and run tests; then I disagree. It's impossible to do this for every platform out there. If what you mean is to just build on Koji, then perhaps, but I was never told it was a *requirement* only that it would be nice. In any case, I didn't deny there was a problem, or tried to deflect my fault; all I did was to object to your offensive comment. > > > Well, you are not the first person who is outsmarting himself by using > > > handwritten makefiles. > > > > That's an uncalled for assumption, and ad hominem attack. > No, it's 20 years of SW development experience. Your experience can give you statistical guidance to assume that *probably* I'm shooting myself in the foot here, but that's not what you said. You didn't show any doubt that I was outsmarting myself, without knowing anything about me; that's a fallacy of accident. > As I tried to tell you before, you are not the first persoon who is switching > to manually written makefiles without being aware about the bugs and short > comings his approach carries - There have been generations of programmers > before you. I maintain multiple widely used packages that don't use autotools, and in each one of them I've found it's significantly easier to deal with, even on multiple platforms (which I test) like: i386, arm, and mingw32. Besides, I'm encouraged by good examples (IMO) of packages that don't use autotools: git, qemu, ffmpeg. Your FUD doesn't scare me. > > What do you even know about me? > Well, to me, it's apparent that you are at the very beginning of getting > started with packaging and system integration. You are wrong, I maintain important packages on the Nokia N900 (debian based): http://maemo.gitorious.org/maemo-multimedia/gst-dsp http://maemo.gitorious.org/maemo-multimedia/gst-openmax http://maemo.gitorious.org/maemo-multimedia/dsp-tools But that was actually a rhetorical question: it doesn't matter what you think about me; the choice of not using autotools resides completely on upstream, and is not something to be discussed in this review request. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review