Re: Bug#910446: NMU diff (substantive patches in git-format-patch form)
- Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2018 22:55:10 +0100
- From: Ian Jackson <ijackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Bug#910446: NMU diff (substantive patches in git-format-patch form)
Guido Günther writes ("Re: Bug#910446: NMU diff (substantive patches in git-format-patch form)"):
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 03:36:49PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Hi. I fixed this bug, and some other FTBFS, and am about to upload
> > the result. I'm doing this myself, right away, because this is an RC
> > bug which has triggered the autoremover to want to remove dgit.
> > Following the recommendation in dev ref 5.11.1, I have not use
> > DELAYED; and because I doubt that actually uploading it now will cause
> > you any difficulty. I hope that's OK.
> > The patches I made are attached. You can also find this as a git
> > branch, here:
> That's actually not what I prefer since I
Sorry about that. But,
> - said I'm about to fix this
I did look in the bug  before starting work, this lunchtime UK
time, and there was no response there.
I have just checked the bug again, and your message to it crossed with
my decision to go ahead with the upload. The timestamp on the
relevant .changes file shows that I did my formal build-for-upload at
14:28 UTC. I and evidently spent a few minutes getting my NMU diff
email into shape and I sent that email at 14:36 and did the actual
dgit push at 14:37.
Your message to the bug was at 14:31 UTC. I confess didn't check the
bug again in the 9 minutes between `dgit sbuild' and `dgit push'.
To be honest, if you had said any time in the past week, in the bug,
that you were intending to fix it I would have been quite happy to
leave the work to you. But there was nothing from you in the bug and
the upstream git server (which I was able to see via http, even if the
git interface was giving me trouble) showed no recent activiy.
> - there's plenty of time until the autoremoval hits us
I'm generally quite busy and I had time and headspace to do this
technical work now. I wasn't confident that that would occur again in
the next few weeks.
I'm sorry to be told that I have engaged in "sub par interaction". I
was trying to help. Can you explain to me what concrete problem my
action has caused you ?
I appreciate that being the recipient, several times a year, of
autoremoval notifications (not just from gbp) is a hazard of sitting
on top of a large dependency stack. But it would be nice to be able
to at least fix these things oneself without being criticised.
It would be really helpful if people would respond to RC bugs *before*
their entire reverse dependency stack has received an `autoremoval'
I guess I can be criticised for not emailing the bug before starting
work. Looking at my irc transcript it looks like I started at 12:00
UTC or so. Of course once one has started on something like this it
is very discouraging to be told to stop and throw one's work away -
and I guess your message to the bug was prompted by the autoremoval
mail which had been sent ovrnight, so an additional mail from me would
have waited anyway. So probably in this case if I had emailed the bug
at 12:00ish UTC it would have made no difference.
Ian Jackson <ijackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.