[Pkg-xen-devel] Bug#695221: Bug#695221: confirmed bug, serious

[Mike McClurg]

Hi all,

Sorry for top posting. I spoke with Rob, the author of xcp-networkd, who
thinks that he's fixed this bug in a later upstream release. We'll take a
look at the repo tomorrow and see if we can find the commit that fixes this
issue.

Mike


On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 3:22 AM, Thomas Goirand <zigo at debian.org> wrote:

> On 02/11/2013 04:22 PM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> > Having it marked RC may allow a patch into wheezy.
>
> Marking it RC is only delaying the release, that's it. I have already
> fixed multiple bugs which were not marked as RC, and the release team
> accepted the changes. Even after Wheezy is released, it is possible to
> fix problems in the stable distribution.
>
> > Maybe even a small patch:
>
> A small patch is what we should all aim at. I'm sure the problem isn't
> so complicated, and that we can fix it.
>
> Of course, it would help if Mike and Jon were a bit more cooperative and
> were trying to fix the issue, but it seems they are quite busy these
> days (or maybe in holidays?).
>
> >
> > - updating the README
> >
> > - changing pif-reconfigure-ip to give an error if the user tries a
> > netmask that is not supported, e.g.
> >
> > "XCP only works on a Class C subnet with a netmask 255.255.255.0.  Your
> > changes have not been applied.
> > See bug 695221 or the README file."
>
> Yeah, I think that is indeed a good idea to write this!
>
> > These things would be small fixes but would make the user's first
> > experience of XCP less frustrating
> >
> > The last thing you want is for people to get frustrated and start
> > thinking that they should try the Ubuntu version or the ISO installer:
> > http://www.xen.org/download/xcp/index_1.6.0.html#install
>
> Well, yes, I would like to have more Debian users, and that people use
> less XCP from the ISO installer (eg: CentOS based). However, the Ubuntu
> package of XCP is synced from Debian, so these are the exact same
> package (with only a possible delay in having the Ubuntu package).
> Nobody in Ubuntu works on the XCP packaging, the work is only been done
> by myself in Debian.
>
> >> Ultimately, this is the job of the maintainer of a given package to
> >> decide the seriousness of a bug. To me, setting it to either normal or
> >> important is exactly the same (eg: it is on my radar, and I really want
> >> to have it fix), and discussing the seriousness doesn't help. Discussing
> >> ways to fix it does.
> >
> > It's not quite the same, because the release team wouldn't accept a
> > patch/unblock request for a normal issue
>
> This statement is completely wrong. The criteria for the release team to
> accept changes is not the severity of a bug only. If we find a way to
> fix this problem, I'm quite sure that the release team will accept the
> patch, regardless of the severity set in the BTS.
>
> > I'm hoping that the fix for this might be quite trivial and therefore
> > acceptable to the release team.
>
> Yeah, that's more in line! If the fix is small, and even trivial, and
> easy to review for them (which is quite likely to be the case,
> considering that just fixing the db with an editor fixed it for you),
> then they will accept it.
>
> I'm also quite sure that they would accept any documentation change at
> this point of the release.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Thomas
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-xen-devel/attachments/20130218/ca234edf/attachment-0001.html>