Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.project > #9916 > unrolled thread

Bug#532856: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#532856: Bug#532856: closed by Mathieu Parent <math.parent@gmail.com> (Closing " umask settings overridden by Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) clients")

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.project

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Bug#532856: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#532856: Bug#532856: closed by Mathieu Parent <math.parent@gmail.com> (Closing " umask settings overridden by Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) clients") Josip Rodin <joy@debbugs.entuzijast.net> - 2018-07-02 01:20 +0200
    Re: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#532856: Bug#532856: closed by Mathieu  Parent <math.parent@gmail.com> (Closing " umask settings overridden by Mac OS  X 10.5 (Leopard) clients") Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2018-07-02 05:40 +0200
    Bug#532856: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#532856: Bug#532856: Bug#532856: closed by Mathieu Parent <math.parent@gmail.com> (Closing " umask settings overridden by Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) clients") Josip Rodin <joy@debbugs.entuzijast.net> - 2018-07-03 23:30 +0200
      Bug#532856: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#532856: Bug#532856: Bug#532856: Bug#532856: closed by Mathieu Parent <math.parent@gmail.com> (Closing " umask settings overridden by Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) clients") Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org> - 2018-07-03 23:50 +0200
    Bug#532856: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#532856: Bug#532856: closed by Mathieu Parent <math.parent@gmail.com> (Closing " umask settings overridden by Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) clients") Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2018-07-17 17:00 +0200
      Bug#532856: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#532856: Bug#532856: closed by Mathieu Parent <math.parent@gmail.com> (Closing " umask settings overridden by Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) clients") Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> - 2018-07-17 17:30 +0200
      Re: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#532856: Bug#532856: closed by Mathieu  Parent <math.parent@gmail.com> (Closing " umask settings overridden by Mac  OS X 10.5 (Leopard) clients") Josip Rodin <joy@debbugs.entuzijast.net> - 2018-07-20 22:10 +0200
        Re: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#532856: Bug#532856: closed by Mathieu  Parent <math.parent@gmail.com> (Closing " umask settings overridden by Mac  OS X 10.5 (Leopard) clients") Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2018-07-21 01:20 +0200

#9916 — Bug#532856: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#532856: Bug#532856: closed by Mathieu Parent <math.parent@gmail.com> (Closing " umask settings overridden by Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) clients")

On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 09:41:39AM +1200, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > How does that make sense? If the option is called "do X", and fails to
> > do X in some opaque circumstances, how is that not a bug? At the very
> > very least, it needs to be explained somewhere. Last I checked, there
> > was nothing in the smb.conf manual to indicate that any of this would
> > happen. The existence of a chmod extension isn't even mentioned. (As I
> > said before.)
> > 
> > On a more general note, I would recommend triaging user bug reports when you
> > are available to actually try to understand what users are saying. Ignoring
> > information provided and repeating the same question all over again is
> > unhelpful at best.
> 
> Honestly, this really isn't the place.
> 
> While this goes against general Debian practice, these bug reports are
> really not a good place to discuss general issues with Samba.  

It's unreasonable to have a Debian package that doesn't respect the
universally common practices of the Debian bug tracking system.

The Debian social contract doesn't go into that much detail, to explicitly
require keeping bugs open because they exist in practice -- but common sense
and decades of precedent do.

Or is this some new thing that we're now doing, am I that much out of
the loop?

-- 
     2. That which causes joy or happiness.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#9917 — Re: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#532856: Bug#532856: closed by Mathieu Parent <math.parent@gmail.com> (Closing " umask settings overridden by Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) clients")

On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 7:14 AM, Josip Rodin wrote:

> The Debian social contract doesn't go into that much detail, to explicitly
> require keeping bugs open because they exist in practice -- but common sense
> and decades of precedent do.
>
> Or is this some new thing that we're now doing, am I that much out of
> the loop?

Several Debian teams for popular packages don't have the time to
triage the volume of incoming bug reports. They use various strategies
to redirect those reports to the relevant upstream projects, including
reportbug notices, closing bugs so reporters triage them and other
things. This has been the norm for a while, probably at least half a
decade.

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9918 — Bug#532856: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#532856: Bug#532856: Bug#532856: closed by Mathieu Parent <math.parent@gmail.com> (Closing " umask settings overridden by Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) clients")

On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 01:39:34PM +1200, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> We simply don't have the resources to manage the tasks you suggest

I'm saying one shouldn't send a message to nnnnn-close@bugs.d.o and instead
just keep an existing bug open. That change alone actually conserves
resources. Sending a message to the control bot to tag it upstream and
perhaps mark it wontfix or a custom tag called triaged or something like
that - doesn't sound particularly more taxing compared to closing.

> Upstream (non-packaging) bugs filed here at best have to be copied into
> Samba's bugzilla before any progress can be made and the lossy nature
> of that just makes work for everyone. 

This is literally what every other maintainer is taught to do - weed through
the chaff and forward upstream stuff upstream.

> Finally, debates, even meta debates, about unsupported and ancient
> Samba and MacOS versions are simply not productive.  

Yet, this isn't one, as I've long given up on expecting that upgrade path to
be fixed - I've reverted to arguing simply that if there's a piece of
functionality (Unix extensions) in the software, the documentation for the
software should mention its basic characteristics, esp. those that have been
known to cause annoying behavior in practice.

It would be akin to having the Apache documentation describe its HTTPS
support with two sentences in a manual, and have nothing else whatsoever
(yet it ships e.g. /etc/apache2/mods-available/ssl.conf with a fair bit
of info, and there's other docs too).

-- 
     2. That which causes joy or happiness.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9919 — Bug#532856: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#532856: Bug#532856: Bug#532856: Bug#532856: closed by Mathieu Parent <math.parent@gmail.com> (Closing " umask settings overridden by Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) clients")

On Tue, 2018-07-03 at 23:19 +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:

> Yet, this isn't one, as I've long given up on expecting that upgrade path to
> be fixed - I've reverted to arguing simply that if there's a piece of
> functionality (Unix extensions) in the software, the documentation for the
> software should mention its basic characteristics, esp. those that have been
> known to cause annoying behavior in practice.
> 
> It would be akin to having the Apache documentation describe its HTTPS
> support with two sentences in a manual, and have nothing else whatsoever
> (yet it ships e.g. /etc/apache2/mods-available/ssl.conf with a fair bit
> of info, and there's other docs too).

Please take this upstream, with a patch.  This isn't the forum, and
won't achieve your aims.

Sorry,

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett
https://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team         https://samba.org
Samba Development and Support, Catalyst IT   
https://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9922

On 07/02/2018 01:14 AM, Josip Rodin wrote:
> The Debian social contract doesn't go into that much detail, to explicitly
> require keeping bugs open because they exist in practice -- but common sense
> and decades of precedent do.

I very much don't agree with the above. It is useless to keep bugs open
if they are not actionable. Bugs are reminders for the maintainers of
what they should do. If they can't do anything, then it goes on the way
to do useful things, and it is best if they can be closed.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

P.S: I don't know about this particular bug, just reacting on your
sentence above.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9923

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> I very much don't agree with the above. It is useless to keep bugs open
> if they are not actionable. Bugs are reminders for the maintainers of
> what they should do. If they can't do anything, then it goes on the way
> to do useful things, and it is best if they can be closed.

In Debian, open bugs are often also reminders to others that a bug is
known, it is still active, and what has been discussed about it.  This
would be more useful if people were better at searching for open issues
in the BTS before complaining, but still...

Anyway, since it is a fact that non-actionable bugs can be a distraction
for the maintainer, we have a middle-ground: we have tags like
"wontfix", not to mention usertags, and the BTS allows one to filter out
listing by tags easily enough.  It might be nice to enhance it to allow
one to set a cookie with personal default filters, though.

Anyway (and this is a generic response, not particular to this bug), if
one is going to close an unfixed bug because it is unactionable, it
would be rather helpful if that bug is tagged "wontfix", just like if it
were to be kept open.

-- 
  Henrique Holschuh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9924 — Re: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#532856: Bug#532856: closed by Mathieu Parent <math.parent@gmail.com> (Closing " umask settings overridden by Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) clients")

On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 04:49:57PM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 07/02/2018 01:14 AM, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > The Debian social contract doesn't go into that much detail, to explicitly
> > require keeping bugs open because they exist in practice -- but common sense
> > and decades of precedent do.
> 
> I very much don't agree with the above. It is useless to keep bugs open
> if they are not actionable. Bugs are reminders for the maintainers of
> what they should do. If they can't do anything, then it goes on the way
> to do useful things, and it is best if they can be closed.

I don't know how you happen to define the word actionable, but English
dictionaries say it's "capable of being acted on" or ready to be put into
action". In all cases, these kinds of bugs could still get picked up by
someone and acted upon (unarchived, reopened, forwarded upstream, possibly
with a fix, closed when a package is released containing one).

This idea that the bug reports of a package are merely a tool for the
maintainer, who is at the same time able to arbitrarily decide that they
can't do anything and that it's getting in their way... that seems way too
possessive and against the spirit of the relevant part of the social
contract. The bug report database should never be a personal fief of the
maintainers, instead its primary purpose should be - to provide a useful
service to users.

https://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#closing spells things out nicely
right at the start. I can understand tolerating hard cases with difficult
packages, but we should not advocate a degradation of the golden standard
because of outliers.

-- 
     2. That which causes joy or happiness.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9925 — Re: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#532856: Bug#532856: closed by Mathieu Parent <math.parent@gmail.com> (Closing " umask settings overridden by Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) clients")

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 10:08:19PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> https://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#closing spells things out nicely
> right at the start. I can understand tolerating hard cases with difficult
> packages, but we should not advocate a degradation of the golden standard
> because of outliers.
 
FWIW, for src:piuparts I tend to close "unlikely" wishlist bugs after a while,
pointing to https://blog.liw.fi/posts/wishlist-bugs/ as a rationale and
keeping a list of "such closed wishes" at the bottom of
https://sources.debian.org/src/piuparts/sid/TODO/

that way, https://bugs.debian.org/src:piuparts is way more useful if I
have some moments to spare on piuparts.

YMMV.


-- 
cheers,
	Holger

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.project

csiph-web