On 10/28/18 2:21 PM, Eli Schwartz wrote:
The problem I see is in your mindset -- I don't think you approach packaging with due respect for quality.
Okay, enough about packaging, what about dealing with bugs? Bugs you've opened in the past, 25 in total: https://bugs.archlinux.org/index.php?opened=22733&status[]= Duplicates of existing bugs: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/51419 https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/52308 https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/53581 https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/49000 https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/51246 Bugs that could not be reproduced: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/50186 https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/57712 User error bugs/not a bug: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/51696 https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/56653 https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/56490 https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/51247 https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/49029 https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/60248 (the recent python2-awkward one) https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/60247 (the other python-awkward bug) Suggestion to modify core packages in non-vanilla ways instead of relying on AUR packages that are customized to the user's needs: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/50054 3 bugs were closed as upstream, not much to do about that. 5 were true bugs and fixed (or pending). 1 was a feature request. ... 15/25 not good track record, with rather a lot of reports that simply weren't correct at all. Particularly eye-raising were: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/60248 -- report bug because we only moved one package to [community], not two https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/51247 -- misconfigured AUR package breaks python interpreter, reports bug https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/49029 -- reports bug for mainline kernel installed from AUR https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/57639 -- I'm rather skeptical of your interaction when resolving this bug, particularly your attempts to "solve" problems by selectively installing packages from [testing], then installing a package from [staging]!!! Ignoring comments on the bug where someone else figured out the issue, adding fuzz comments that distract from solving anything while you argue over whether you should be allowed to report bugs for [staging] packages because "it is clear to all of us that not having libx265 has absolutely nothing to do with the issue", even though that's missing the point because we explicitly hide the staging repos from *everyone* because they're not supposed to be used. Based on your limited interaction in the bugtracker, you seem to have a predisposition towards getting your system into an unsupported state (AUR/staging) and then having problems. In a couple cases you simply failed to read documentation and decided the package was broken as a result of your misunderstanding. Once again, you've ended up doing things which are completely invalid, because [staging] is just not something anyone does, ever, for any reasons whatsoever. The only reason to put something into staging in the first place is if it's 100% broken and is part of a rebuild involving multiple packages. I don't feel that this shows the right attitude for packaging in [community]. -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User