USN-186-1 (mozilla, mozilla-firefox) updates broken on Hoary

[John Dong]

On 9/25/05, Stephan Hermann <sh at sourcecode.de> wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> so to provide support means:
>
> Hey, Users, take this package, break your system, and complain
> about it to the Ubuntu Support Base?

Please, I fought now 2 days on the german ubuntu channel with your crap,
> and you aren't
>
> 1. on IRC


I'm not much of an IRC person. I'm fully reachable via e-mail and the
forums...

2. u don't provide a separate support base for your repository


We certainly do, via malone and the forums.

3. u didn't care what happend
>
I'm just not going to comment on this one.

So, the best thing is: Shut it down. Every package which is there, can
> be backported to hoary in a better way.


We haven't added a package to unofficial hoary-backports since we got our
official repository. Breezy-backports on the old server will not be created
(except for the -staging branch), so this problem will naturally resolve
itself in Breezy.

But if this is not going to happen, I'll propose towards CC/TB that the
> backports team, like it is now, have to step back, some others will take
> the reponsibilty and following the rules. Not being responsible is one
> thing we should avoid, regarding the userbase.


You're not seeing the whole picture. The team is doing its best to support
the user base. If you do not want to deal with it, refer the users over to
the forums.

These things happened, not because the Ubuntu package was broken, no it
> was yours from unofficial repos. If you're not able to backport the
> packages correctly, please ask. If you don't have the time to ask,
> please step back and let others, who have the time, do it the right way.
>
> Sorry, my 2 €-Cent
> \sh
>
> Am Sonntag, den 25.09.2005, 11:54 -0400 schrieb John Dong:
> > It certainly did happen, ogra. It's just that there are still a
> > significant number of packages that didn't pass the more rigorous
> > requirements imposed by the movement to official, and we still have to
> > provide support for those in Hoary's world.
> >
> > On 9/25/05, Oliver Grawert <ogra at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> > hi,
> > Am Sonntag, den 25.09.2005, 16:11 +0200 schrieb Martin Pitt:
> > > The security update is fine, the problem is that you use
> > backports,
> > > which are screwed up in Hoary. They renamed the package
> > > "mozilla-firefox" to "firefox" without doing a proper
> > transition, so
> > > you now ended up with having both packages installed, which
> > is bogus.
> > what bothers me most is that we all agreed that the official
> > backports
> > (with exclusion of hoary-extras) would be shut down as soon as
> > the
> > backports team gets free server space, free bandwith and and
> > option to
> > use the build infrastructure for the backports to make them
> > official.
> >
> > why didnt that happen ? its very odd since it occupies a lot
> > of
> > developer time for unnecessary support (which seemingly does
> > not exist
> > for the inofficial backports) three weeks before breezy
> > release, this
> > time would better have been spent fixing bugs in breezy.
> >
> > ciao
> > oli
> >
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
> >
> > iD8DBQBDNr/PSsOT
> > +6LQaTYRAtotAKCRco9HtAUA2YxCVtxZZgTKx74JFACaA2C1
> > Xefs5ufnjJ7pz3LtcDv4GrY=
> > =TKDA
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
> >
> > --
> > ubuntu-backports mailing list
> > ubuntu-backports at lists.ubuntu.com
> > http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> ubuntu-backports mailing list
> ubuntu-backports at lists.ubuntu.com
> http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-backports/attachments/20050925/54b9fc6f/attachment.htm