package deviates from standard mail-transport-agent dependency.
 

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?submitter=andreas%40fatal.se

On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Andreas Henriksson wrote:

> Hello!
>
> Your packag depends on postfix | mail-transport-agent. Exim (v4) is generally
> considered the default mta in Debian and is also the package providing
> mail-transport-agent which has the highest priority.
> Is there any particular reason why your package needs to deviate from
> which mta is pulled in by default? If not, could you please consider
> streamlining your package with the rest so we have a uniform behaviour in
> debian?

Where did you discuss this mass filing of (useless) bugs before you
submitted them?

--
| .'`. ** Debian GNU/Linux **
Peter Palfrader | : :' : The universal
http://www.palfrader.org/ | `. `' Operating System
| `- http://www.debian.org/


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

package deviates from standard mail-transport-agent dependency.
 

On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 09:29:35AM +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?submitter=andreas%40fatal.se

> > Your packag depends on postfix | mail-transport-agent. Exim (v4) is generally
> > considered the default mta in Debian and is also the package providing
> > mail-transport-agent which has the highest priority.
> > Is there any particular reason why your package needs to deviate from
> > which mta is pulled in by default? If not, could you please consider
> > streamlining your package with the rest so we have a uniform behaviour in
> > debian?

> Where did you discuss this mass filing of (useless) bugs before you
> submitted them?

In particular, these bugs are *contrary* to the developing consensus in the
thread at http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/05/msg00381.html ff.

--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

package deviates from standard mail-transport-agent dependency.
 

Steve Langasek schrieb:
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 09:29:35AM +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote:
>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?submitter=andreas%40fatal.se
>
>>> Your packag depends on postfix | mail-transport-agent. Exim (v4) is generally
>>> considered the default mta in Debian and is also the package providing
>>> mail-transport-agent which has the highest priority.
>>> Is there any particular reason why your package needs to deviate from
>>> which mta is pulled in by default? If not, could you please consider
>>> streamlining your package with the rest so we have a uniform behaviour in
>>> debian?
>
>> Where did you discuss this mass filing of (useless) bugs before you
>> submitted them?
>
> In particular, these bugs are *contrary* to the developing consensus in the
> thread at http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/05/msg00381.html ff.
>

What was the developing consensus? Reading the thread again, it wasn't
clear to me, if it was fixing apt to take priorities into account,
providing a default-mta package or a separate mechanism [1] to specify
the default for virtual packages.

I'd be very much interested in the outcome of this discussion, because
I, as maintainer of rsyslog, notice the same issue with regard to the
sysklogd -> rsyslog switch.
Although we have switched to rsyslog as default syslog, a lot of
packages still depend on sysklogd | system-log-daemon.

Cheers,
Michael

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/05/msg00408.html
--
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?

package deviates from standard mail-transport-agent dependency.
 

On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 12:37:38AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Where did you discuss this mass filing of (useless) bugs before you
> > submitted them?

The previous discussions has lead nowhere. No use in discussing it yet
again, instead it's time to act!

>
> In particular, these bugs are *contrary* to the developing consensus in the
> thread at http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/05/msg00381.html ff.

There where no consensus, since you where all just discussing overengineered
solutions for solving the problem and all pointing out bugs in eachothers
suggestions. Using exim4 | mail-transport-agent is the most
straight-forward solution and will require minimal changes.
When (or even if) the default mta changes, we can easily introduce the
default-mta then (and maybe people would even have come up with a bug-free
overengineered solution by then).

I offer to fix up all packages to exim4 | mail-transport-agent *and*
when there is a working default-mta proposal and a need for changing the
actual default mta fix it up in every package.

If people put as much effort into actually working on packages
as they did on debating in useless threads that leads nowhere the
distribution would be in a hell of alot better shape.

Over and out.

--
Regards,
Andreas Henriksson


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

package deviates from standard mail-transport-agent dependency.
 

> On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 12:37:38AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > Where did you discuss this mass filing of (useless) bugs before you
> > > submitted them?
>
> The previous discussions has lead nowhere. No use in discussing it yet
> again, instead it's time to act!
>
But mass-bug-filing without prior notice is no proper way to act.

> >
> > In particular, these bugs are *contrary* to the developing consensus in the
> > thread at http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/05/msg00381.html ff.
>
> There where no consensus, since you where all just discussing overengineered
> solutions for solving the problem and all pointing out bugs in eachothers
> suggestions. Using exim4 | mail-transport-agent is the most
> straight-forward solution and will require minimal changes.
[...]

Solution to which problem? I completely fail to see a _problem_ here. Ok, not
all people get installed the same MTA -- so, what? If people care about the MTA
(like I do), they have their preferred MTA installed anyway.

>
> If people put as much effort into actually working on packages
> as they did on debating in useless threads that leads nowhere the
> distribution would be in a hell of alot better shape.
>
> Over and out.
>

Why don't you build your own CDD? So you don't need to discuss anything. Of
course, some discussions fail to reach consesus. This simply means that none of
the proposals has been good enough. Make a better _proposal_ and then according
to that. In this particular case, however, I'd even say that there has been some
consesus, just nobody stepped up to implement it.

Best,
Michael

package deviates from standard mail-transport-agent dependency.
 

On Thu, 2008-08-21 at 11:19 +0200, Andreas Henriksson wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 12:37:38AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > Where did you discuss this mass filing of (useless) bugs before you
> > > submitted them?
>
> The previous discussions has lead nowhere. No use in discussing it yet
> again, instead it's time to act!

Not really. Actions that fail to address the problem and promote a
method that both papers over the cracks and has had a chance to find
support and failed, are (in my estimation) a waste of time. Others would
appear to agree that these bugs are useless. I don't see why any of
these bug reports should not be automatically tagged "wontfix" and
closed without further comment.

> >
> > In particular, these bugs are *contrary* to the developing consensus in the
> > thread at http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/05/msg00381.html ff.
>
> There where no consensus,

In fact, there was a resistance against the method that you have decided
to impose unilaterally. Where there was not a definite consensus was on
which of the alternative methods was better.

> since you where all just discussing overengineered
> solutions for solving the problem and all pointing out bugs in eachothers
> suggestions.

Throwing those ideas away is not a solution either.

> Using exim4 | mail-transport-agent is the most
> straight-forward solution and will require minimal changes.

In your opinion - others disagreed at the time and appear to disagree
currently too. Mass bug filings need consensus - you cannot impose an
arbitrary time limit and go ahead anyway. This isn't a release goal, it
isn't relevant to the Lenny release, it is just wasting time that could
be better spent on RC bugs.

> When (or even if) the default mta changes, we can easily introduce the
> default-mta then (and maybe people would even have come up with a bug-free
> overengineered solution by then).

Debian does tend to go for the more robust solution - it does take more
time to develop but whether you like it or not, you cannot impose a less
rigorous solution unilaterally.

--


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

package deviates from standard mail-transport-agent dependency.
 

On Thu, 21 Aug 2008, Andreas Henriksson wrote:
> I offer to fix up all packages to exim4 | mail-transport-agent *and*

Don't do it on any packages that tagged the bug wontfix, at least not
without asking first (AND getting a positive response). Some of the
packages have real reasons to prefer an MTA other than exim4.

--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

package deviates from standard mail-transport-agent dependency.
 

Le Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 12:18:25PM +0200, Michael Tautschnig a écrit :
>
> Why don't you build your own CDD?

Because Debian Integrated Solutions (that were formerly called Custom
Debian Distributions) are not forks, but 100 % internal projects :)

Have a nice day,

--
Charles Plessy
Debian Med packaging team,
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

package deviates from standard mail-transport-agent dependency.
 

Andreas Henriksson <andreas@fatal.se> writes:
> The previous discussions has lead nowhere. No use in discussing it yet
> again, instead it's time to act!

Put down that crack pipe. Now.

> I offer to fix up all packages to exim4 | mail-transport-agent *and*
> when there is a working default-mta proposal and a need for changing the
> actual default mta fix it up in every package.

Nice offer, but please let these packages alone. Your changes wouldn't end
up in lenny anyway, so we do have enough time to discuss a proper
solution and implement it.

Marc
--
BOFH #213:
Change your language to Finnish.