Re: Who uploaded gnome-cpufreq-applet to archive?
Ond?ej Surý wrote:
> I am quite disappointed! I did proper ITP of gnome-cpufreq-applet and
> when I uploaded package today I got REJECT mail from installer:
> Rejected: gnome-cpufreq-applet_0.1.1-1_i386.changes: a file with this name already exists in the New directory.
> Rejected: gnome-cpufreq-applet_0.1.1-1.dsc file already exists in the New directory.
> Rejected: gnome-cpufreq-applet_0.1.1.orig.tar.gz file already exists in the New directory.
> Rejected: gnome-cpufreq-applet_0.1.1-1.diff.gz file already exists in the New directory.
> Rejected: gnome-cpufreq-applet_0.1.1-1_i386.deb file already exists in the New directory.
newraff!joey(pts/2):/org/ftp.debian.org/queue/new> cat gnome-cpufreq-applet_0.1.1-1_i386.changes
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 14:21:42 +1100
Architecture: source i386
Maintainer: Andrew Lau <email@example.com>
Changed-By: Andrew Lau <firstname.lastname@example.org>
gnome-cpufreq-applet - CPU Frequency Scaling Monitor applet for GNOME
gnome-cpufreq-applet (0.1.1-1) unstable; urgency=low
* Initial release of the Debian GNU/Linux package.
6f4b20e2f4ed87fd7223a546b631d990 1232 gnome optional gnome-cpufreq-applet_0.1.1-1.dsc
6d48c21f5d3031837c719c1de693921d 405211 gnome optional gnome-cpufreq-applet_0.1.1.orig.tar.gz
4c7c1b510f5da7524993db61a6a78150 1456 gnome optional gnome-cpufreq-applet_0.1.1-1.diff.gz
ec1ecee85efef43829023a6dbdc96af2 65262 gnome optional gnome-cpufreq-applet_0.1.1-1_i386.deb
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
newraff!joey(pts/2):/org/ftp.debian.org/queue/new> keyring-verify gnome-cpufreq-applet_0.1.1-1_i386.changes
gnome-cpufreq-applet_0.1.1-1_i386.changes Good signature from "Josselin Mouette <email@example.com>" (0xD75F8533)
> I hope I still know what I am doing, so I think that somebody didn't
> honor my ITP and uploaded package without contacting me and even without
> his own ITP. I recommend this developer to read again Developer
> Reference and especially Chapter 5.1 New packages.
> I think this is unacceptable and offending package should be removed
> from New queue.
I believe you are way overreacting. You should rather first fint out
who made the other upload and than talk to the person.
ITP: Feb 23, Upload Mar 9, your Mar 11.
It's not that you uploaded the package right after you sent the ITP,
but several weeks later. If other people are in need of the package
I could imagine that they don't want to wait any longer, especially
since you haven't answered the question of teo if you had packages
Next step: Please talk to andrew to find out who will maintain
this package in the future.
GNU does not eliminate all the world's problems, only some of them.
-- The GNU Manifesto