Re: python-networkx_1.10-1_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into experimental
> I see nothing wrong with Goirand's upload. I believe Sandro Tosi is
> still using the pre-binNMU, pre-NMU, pre-LowNMU, pre-Team packaging
> maintenance mentality which is not the commonly accepted behaviour and
> mentality in Debian anymore.
this is not a binNMU (which is irrelevant here), nor a NMU (even
though lintian warned it was), nor my packages are in lowNMU list (so,
again, irrelevant), it is indeed maintained in the DPMT, which has a
set of rules called policy. are you asserting that it's perfectly fine
to ignore the policy which should bind our work in this team?
> Sando, if you don't like something in
> particular about a particular upload you should fix those points and
> re-upload and e.g. send an email with a diff to the last uploader with
> code review and comments.
what? so $random_developer arrives, changes the packages, does
mistakes, uploads nonetheless, I should happily fix them, and then let
them know what was wrong? so why shouldnt that very same
$random_developer get in touch with the maintainer who has done the
work so far?
> Complaining about the maintainer vs uploader
> policy does not improve the package in question.
nor is uploading a package just for their own interest and then let
the maintainer fix the mistakes done. This has happened in the past,
most of the times with Thomas, that's enough.
> As all uploads - good
> and bad - are always done with only best intentions in mind, do take
> that into account. Nobody is trying to attack you, your packages, or
> somehow sabotage Debian.
I dont think you can assert what others' intentions are (even if good
faith *can* be assumed), still shielding behind the "team maintenance"
to do whatever one pleases is WRONG! stop being apologetic for such
behavior.
--
Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu)
My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
Reply to: