[Pkg-mediawiki-devel] Bug#388616: Making mediawiki FHS compliant
frank at kuesterei.ch
Mon Feb 26 09:25:42 CET 2007
Romain Beauxis <toots at rastageeks.org> wrote:
> Le samedi 24 février 2007 17:02, vous avez écrit :
>> > Frank, if you think this can be solved cleanly in mediawiki1.7 why don't
>> > you just put up a complete patch instead of only one of the things to do
>> > ? If then it looks good, I would apply it happily.
>> Hm, I didn't do it mostly because if I send a complete patch, I don't do
>> that without exhaustive testing. And this I didn't want to do on a bug
>> that had an etch-ignore tag. But it seems the tag is based on
>> incomplete information about options to solve the bug, isn't it?
> You say that while later on you claimed not to understand everything about the
> package (update script). Don't you have the impression that this judgement is
> also based on incomplete information on the package ?
Of course, but how does that matter? The point is simply, if the
release managers intend to keep the etch-ignore pattern, and you as the
maintainer prefer to fix the bug only with the new upstream version,
there's little point in working out a patch that will never be applied.
Therefore I'm asking the release team whether they still think that the
etch-ignore tag should stay.
> That's why I propose you to do the work you are asking us. Then you'll
> understand all the things about the package, and will be able to state such
This, however, I do not understand. You are talking about an update
script which so far I did not notice.
Either this means that something additional is going on which needs to
be adapted to the new file location, and I don't even know whether it's
something upon package upgrade, or some part of the Wiki's functionality
that I have not tested so far. In this case it might indeed be that
things would get even more complicated to fix.
On the other hand, it could also mean that there is already some code to
handle this transition.
Or it could mean yet something else. It would be more productive if you
could be more explicit what you are referring to. Naturally someone who
has only had a short look at the package knows it much worse than you,
even if I have a different way to look at things and found out
(correctly or not) that it's simple to fix the configuration file location.
Dr. Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
More information about the Pkg-mediawiki-devel