Bug#784070: is it maybe possible to settle dislikings and fix this bug?

[Paul Muster]

Dear Michael,

thanks for clarifying the situation.

> serverfault solution isn't exactly wrong, it is incomplete, it
> does not cover a situation when you have slow-to-appear devices.
> This solution, however, fixes the problem in this bugreport,
> a problem which I introduced when I tried to address the problem
> with slow-to-appear devices.  Ofcourse it is better to be able
> to boot from a degraded raid than to be able to boot from slow
> devices, esp. since the latter had a workaround.  So in this
> sense, serverfault solution will fix _this_ bug.

so, couldn't you patch the package to fix the problem for all people
that do not have "slow-to-appear devices"?


> But I also dislike doing work which is being thrown away by others,
> since this is a pure waste of time/energy, and time is a very scarse
> resource.  I don't want to do any work if I know this work will be
> thrown away, and here, debian-installer people did throw my work
> a) without a good reason and b) without actual rights for that.

Of course what you describe is extremely disappointing for you. Since I
don't know what exactly happened: There should be a decision committee
which listens to both sides and decides _for Debian_.

> So I stopped maintaining all software which is related to debian-installer,
> because now I know it is just a waste of time.  As simple as that, and
> there's nothing like dislike of someone in there, there's nothing
> personal.

It's not obvious to me why a bug in mdadm can't be fixed because there
is a conflict with the d-i maintainers. Why can d-i maintainers decide
about mdadm?

> In short, I don't maintain mdadm anymore, so there's no reason to
> ask me about it.

That would be very sad because it's a really important package.


Thanks & Greetings,

Paul