Web lists-archives.com

Re: usrmerge -- plan B?




On Nov 26, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud <odyx@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Sorry to be blunt about this, but have you reported these? Sniping at (any) 
No, they have not. There is a lot of handwaving in this thread but very 
few results of actual tests.

After creating again unmerged chroots for the buildds the only bugs 
left, archive-wide, are #860523 (an abandoned package with no reverse 
dependencies, there is even a patch in the BTS) and #913883 (iptables 
mixing manually-created symlinks and diversions).
A few bugs in other packages have been reported and fixed over the years:

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=usrmerge;users=md@xxxxxxxx

So we have:
- very few bugs exposed in other packages
- a track record of them being fixed

These are facts. People being worried if it would work or not on their 
own system are just showing emotions, which are usually not relevant in 
engineering decisions.

> Don't forget that a specificity of our bug report system is that the only 
> measure of "it worked without issues" that we have is popcon; we only get a 
> measure of how much things fail, not how good they work:
> 
> 	https://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=usrmerge
This is only partially relevant because after the conversion there is no 
reason to keep the package around and it can just be removed.

-- 
ciao,
Marco

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature