Re: [debian-devel] Proposal for removal of mICQ package
>--[Eduard Bloch]--<edi@gmx.de>
> > His next step should probably have been to take it to the Technical
> > Committee, but apparently he either wasn't aware of that option or was
> > too frustrated with the situation to wait for however long that might
> > take to get a resolution. I don't condone his choice, but I understand
> > the frustration.
> I can understand the frustration as well, but even beeing frustrated I would
> ask whether his action is worth, and stop immediately. Personal conflicts
> should never be fought out on the back of the end users.
It wasn't fought out on the end users. Check your facts. Any user could
download the i386 .deb from micq.org, or recompile from pristine sources.
> > Also note that the program does not fail on certain _systems_ -- you can
> > download Ruediger's own .deb package, built from exactly the same source
> > code, and it will function normally. It is only the official Debian
> Also note that it is _not_ the same source code that you get from Rüdiger, the
> additional Debian stuff is different.
You don't understand. If Debian gives you different source than micq.org,
than that's because Debian modified it.
> > _package_ that doesn't work (regardless of what system it's running on),
> > and only because the Debian maintainer persisted in not doing a simple
> > thing that upstream had requested (defining the EXTRAVERSION variable).
> I still fail to see the big importance of that version.
There is no need for you to see it if you refuse to do so. Unless there is
any problem with it, why not just do it?
> why should someone report FTBFS trouble to him when the package passed all
> Debian checks?
Because mICQ is an ICQ client and just contacting the author is just much
easier. The last person complaining about #167610 was just yesterday when I
was talking with madkiss.
--
100 DM = 51 € 13 ¢.
100 € = 195 DM 58 pf.
mailto:ruediger@ruediger-kuhlmann.de
http://www.ruediger-kuhlmann.de/
Reply to: