On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 09:06:37 -0800, Chris Holder <glimmerdark@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >it could be implied that 'for him, it works like a charm', or > more appropriately, he hasn't had any issues that have caused him to > stop using rawhide. I write to remove all doubt about the implication of the scope of his comment for those who will find this thread and read into his statement an impression of wonderous enjoyment for all who use rawhide. I insist of people being explicit about their rawhide experience and to make sure that public statements are not easily misconstrued. I've seen too many people who aren't prepared to eat rawhide step into it based SOLELY on seeing someone else go 'works for me' without the other person providing any caveats about the general robustness of rawhide from day to day. Rawhide eats babies. There is no truer statement. > there's nothing wrong with correcting people on the list, even > aggressively when needed, but come on.. don't snap at someone because > they responded, I assure you... this was not snapping. If you want to see an example of what happens when i snap, i could very easily arrange it to give you some perspective. For the sake of others on the list however we can negotiate the seminar arrangements off-list if you so desire. I can tell you that the enrollment fee in the 'watch Jef go off on someone' seminar course is $3,000 US. > he's testing rawhide on at least 2 machines, most likely with widely > varied hardware, and using these boxes as his daily computers.. does > he frequently post to the list? yeah.. And yet even a package maintainer on this same thread before my post assumed he was using fc3 repos and not development.... which by the way underscores my point about being as explicit as possible when making statements about rawhide packages. You just can't assume people are going to understand your 'implicit' statements. > get something fixed, he's just passing along what he's seeing, and > asking a question here and there about it. if all the testers minded > their own business, and never made a sound.. what exactly would the > purpose of the list be? Did i ask him to mind their own business.... no... I told him how to go about getting the dependancy problems fixed. I actually answered his question. There are packaging issues that need to be fixed by the maintainers that prevent the packages from installing with out dependancy failures. The ONLY way to get that fixed is to get binaries rebuilt. Now.. he can either download the srpms and edit the spec files and rebuild them for himself wasting effort that a package maintainer will have to redo anyways or he can file this issue with bugzilla and make the maintainers aware. Notice again that one package maintainer on this thread was already confused by the original post and though he was talking about fc3 update repos and not rawhide. This list is meant to be a resource to discuss problems, sure... but fixes to problems once confirmed are done via bugreports in bugzilla. This has been and will continue to be how fixes get developed. He asked how to get this fixed, and I told him. Search bugzilla for reports, if not reported file a new bugreport. This list is most effective when used to ask other testers to confirm problems, with the end goal of producing a bug report with as much specific information as possible to aid the package developers and maintainters in fixing problems. No matter what the problem is however... problems are fixed primarily via bugreports not primarily with list discussion. And I stand by my statement... I am greatly concerned about how someone who has been using rawhide for multiple number of years hasn't learned that these sort of packaging problems are common and that to get them resolved is to get bugreports filed that maintainers are going to see. This would indicate a failure of communication as to rawhide's goals and how to use rawhide in a responsible manner to generate useful feedback to package maintainers. You absolutely can not depend on a maintainer reading a post in a mailinglist, maintainers are made aware of problems via bugzilla so that issues can be tracked. He asked how to get it fixed.. i gave him the the answer. I am very concerned that someone running rawhide regularly since rhl8 hasn't repeatedly run into several of the inumerably infinite packaging errors resulting in exactly the same sorts of dependancy problems. This sort of thing is very common with rawhide and probably the most trivial sort of problem to confirm. While it's nice to maybe inform the rest of the testers of the problems existance with a note like: "Hey guys FYI i ran into these packaging problems with the latest rawhide build." Its much better if you go: "Hey guys FYI i ran into these packaging problems with the latest rawhide build and here are the bug numbers that have been filed about the issues" Every rawhide user should understand the importance of filing and citing bug reports about issues and its disheartening to see an experienced rawhide user fail to exhibit this understanding even when discussing trivially shallow packaging problems that are historically common for rawhide. -jef"did i mention you get a price break if you enroll in 'Jef's guide to beating a dead horse' seminar as well?"spaleta > if nothing else, comments like his give users something to find when > they search through the list archives, trying to find out why > something is acting the way it does. > > Chris > > -- > fedora-test-list mailing list > fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe: > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list >