ubuntu-bugcontrol team mailing list archive

[Phillip Susi <psusi@xxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 3/31/2014 9:48 AM, Daniel Letzeisen wrote:
> 
> On 03/31/2014 09:34 AM, Phillip Susi wrote:
>> One or two developers do not get to ignore policies set for the
>> whole project because they feel like it.
> If devs are not employed by Canonical, then Canonical cannot make
> them deal with bugs according to your wishes, especially if they
> have good justification for their decisions (and they do). If you
> can't deal with the fact that Kubuntu devs are special snowflakes,
> then you should do yourself a favor and just leave those bugs
> alone. I do agree that there should be more guidelines on what
> packages fall into this category, and how to deal with them. A
> policy along the lines of "every KDE/Kubuntu bug must be linked
> with an upstream bug to receive developer attention" might be
> helpful here.

First, it isn't my wishes, and second, it isn't Canonical; it is the
Ubuntu project, and it is governed by the Ubuntu Community Council et
al.  If developers don't want to follow the rules they set forth, then
they won't be developers.

I'm a developer myself but am not paid by anyone to work on Ubuntu,
but I'm still expected to play by the same rules.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTOXYtAAoJEI5FoCIzSKrwaOsIAKm0xnrKaMUGs3vS7VDK5Hz+
3Dkn1OEUh9re7pzRG4PdWPNXhSxeixfPlNsH9C7b1UOkgUAHd1dmXl1KqIFdh/xa
m+WDtch92joBGkqzMz6iWDgk7Xm7RRm5cT6Oefud1bTG5ZAPEjEglmHTQcR2Qwm2
mOxwTGVeSRj93ywj8597viYOsg0boB7bUiMnu42NI7tz0DGla5Q5WhnEAK2uj/gS
17LuFcTywY1qkXXGfq4tr7lhZVfbuyghr70WInUMNjXWEDYLNNwVuRugZoWlPyyB
jtgNyKZY/7oShADjWPk9740y2VMX8ih2p0E83MDsvHWN/bMH5XQCkf42HKkQMPw=
=mQfx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----