Re: (Beware helix packages) Re: [CrackMonkey] The right to bare legs
Anthony Towns wrote:
> > - Some maintainers don't want to give up the maintainership of their
> > packages.
>
> And if they're already doing a decent job, why should they want to? As
> long as you're feeding the patches you need or want to them, and they're
> actively addressing their bug reports this isn't an issue.
Nice, but as long as they're taking credit for they job they've done so far
they should have no objections to handing over the package to someone
who works full-time on GNOME. It's a simple matter of resources and
commitment. I'd like you to consider the (weak) similarity to the
egcs/gcc situation in the past which had been resolved as egcs being
given official gcc maintainership by GNU. This project should avoid duplication
of effort. As I said before, the volunteer time of GNOME Debian maintainers
can be put to better use. I'm sure there are a lot of issues they could
be interested in, and a lot of good coding to do.
> Removing an unnecessary fork and killing off all the pain that it's
> already causing is much more important than fixing every bug right now.
Hmmm. This fork features much better software than the Debian version.
With a little effort, helix people can fix the dependencies (by
copying things from debian ones, etc as you say), and be the official gnome
maintainers. They don't seem to be trying to introduce incompatibilites
to ensure corporate future. I'm confident that they're just trying
to deliver a good piece of free software.
Thanks,
--
++++-+++-+++-++-++-++--+---+----+----- --- -- - -
+ Eray "exa" Ozkural . . . . . .
+ CS, Bilkent University, Ankara ^ . o . .
| mail: erayo@cs.bilkent.edu.tr . ^ . .
Reply to: