On Fri, Jul 02, 1999 at 03:30:37AM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote: > However, Debian developers need to look at the Debian fork as a > necessary evil which should be minimized if at all possible. This is > just a few bits of common sense, stuff which I am thinking about: I agree to a point.... For example, abiword, when I packaged 0.5.x shipped with their own ispell dictionary (still does, but that's a different point). I created a patch that would allow the spell section to read either our format or redhat's format (different) and passed it back up stream. It was accepted. In Debian, if I were minimizing changes, I'd use the supplied dictionary, however, the user experience would be SOOO much better if abiword used "default.hash" as installed by ispell, instead. I don't *have* to make the change (to keep to a minimum) but feel it should be done for purly esthetics(sp?). > > * join the mailing list for the software you are packaging. Be an > active participant. Absolute must. I also email the author/list to introduce myself and let them know that I'm packagining. There is only one list that, though I'm subscribed, I'm not visibly active on and that's becaue I was asked to not pgp sign messages there... Not much I do in development anyway -- Please cc all mailing list replies to me, also. ========================================================================= * http://benham.net/index.html <gecko@benham.net> <>< * * -------------------- * -----------------------------------------------* * Debian Developer, Debian Project Secretary, Debian Webmaster * * <gecko@debian.org> <secretary@debian.org> <lintian-maint@debian.org> * * <webmaster@debian.org> <gecko@fortunet.com> <webmaster@spi-inc.org> * =========================================================================
Attachment:
pgp3M7jNXO9Lb.pgp
Description: PGP signature