On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 17:03:16 +0930 Simon Lees <sflees@suse.de> wrote:
On 23/06/2019 23:15, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
Am Sonntag, 23. Juni 2019, 10:15:55 CEST schrieb Takashi Iwai:
So, I hope that the discussion won't end up with "policy is policy" or "bot actually helps" type of arguments. Neither stopping bot nor stopping policy enforcement would make things better, because then we'll lose either the correctness or the trackability. OTOH, we shouldn't turn our eyes away from the unsatisfying situation, too. This might be a good opportunity to reconsider what's missing.
Thanks Takashi San, this is the first valuable response in this thread, and one, that (hopefully) not risen Seife's frustrations even more. I highly value Stefan's contributions, not only as a VDR user since 2004 (my family cannot watch TV without it). And as such, I feel really bad in the face of this poor discussion otherwise.
Another sign of improperness in the development process is the revision management. I see failures in the revision display much too often, something that surpasses the changelog abuse significantly from my POV.
The sad reality is however, making obs's version control system much better probably isn't something most people can do in there spare time. Which means the only way its likely to be fixed is if we convince the obs team that its important enough to be worked on.
It can and has been done but the very OBS team has rejected it. That's why we have a bot tracking patch changes when the package storage mechanism used by OBS should be able to do that. I mean the patch was checked into OBS and then later removed. Why can't OBS tell us when it happened, and what were the other package files at the time? Thanks Michal -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org