[Announce] GPGME 1.1.6 released
gpgme at katehok.ac93.org
Sun Jan 13 19:33:42 CET 2008
Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> On 1/13/08, Igor Belyi <gpgme at katehok.ac93.org> wrote:
>> In short, there's no point in getting personal (even if a person is a
>> distro). You have an editor and a compiler, right? That's all you need!
> Gee.... Thanks for clearing this!
You are welcome. ;)
> But if upstream releases product without proper QA (this case with
> its own products!!!), I see no reason why the work should be delegated
There could be any number of reasons - for example, they don't have
enough people for this. A missed test failing usually does not effect
end user and thus do not justifies a new release.
> I work with many types of people and upstreams, g10 is the hardest
> to work with, this also effect the service its users get.
That's the beauty of life - people are different. Some are hard, some
are easy. Even users are different - I don't hear much complains about
g10 from users. Plus, the "hard" part could also come from the lack of
resources they have - I don't believe anyone hard on you on purpose.
> gnupg-2.0.8 already not provided to our users, gpgme-1.6 the same.
> If other downstream will create patch for these, I will gladly add,
> I just don't understand why upstream which aware of an issue does not
> release a fix.
Are we still talking about a fix in a test? The easiest solution is not
to run this failing one, do you want somebody else to create a patch for
you for that?! I suspect I missed something - I thought you were pushing
a change in the main code.
> BTW: Look at the changelog of last couple of version, you will notice how
> many patches from Gentoo were accepted... And still we left with some
I'm very happy to hear that. That's the way to make the world a happier
place! Some patches/tweaks left is not a problem on a grand scale. The
life will be such a waste without some exciting patches made by brave
disto maintainers. :)
More information about the Gnupg-devel