[TIP] Disable keyboard shortcuts in html coverage reports?
barry at python.org
Tue Mar 4 18:03:08 PST 2014
On Mar 05, 2014, at 12:51 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
>I'll take this opportunity to thank Ned for being reasonable in working
>with distributors of his work, to get it operating well in the company
>of other packages on the OS.
Absolutely! coverage is one of those "must have" packages. Thanks too for
Ben for working on the Debian packaging of such an important package.
>Right, with the related duty to advocate better organisation of upstream
>code (including the third-party libraries on which upstream code
>depends) so that it behaves well in an operating system.
>So, please take my comments on where the responsibility lies as advocacy
>for a better situation :-)
>> In this particular case, I'm on the fence. If it's possible to make
>> library, that would be preferred.
>> If that's not feasible, I'd accept vendorized JS libraries in this
>> case, as long as the maintainer (perhaps in cooperation with the
>> coverage developers) promised to be diligent about tracking bugs and
>> especially security issues in the vendorized libraries.
>That's not acceptable for Debian, though. Any bundled third-party
>library code is violating Debian policy, and is thereby a bug to be
>fixed by packaging the third-party library code separately.
>There are a number of such packages in Debian, but nevertheless they all
>violate Debian's policy on breaking out bundled third-party code, and
>introducing more is a regression.
Agreed. It's not pretty, but sometimes we have to accept short term bugs in
order to make progress. I'm glad that you feel strongly against
vendorizing and are working so hard to find a mutually acceptable solution.
 ObPEP 20 words of wisdom:
Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.
Although practicality beats purity.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the testing-in-python