[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: QT needs new maintainer(s), or at least an NMU



On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 08:53:54AM -0400, Christopher Martin wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I had assumed that the lack of QT updates was a conscious choice by the 
> KDE maintainers to hold off on uploading QT 3.3. But your message implies 
> that this isn't really the case.
> 
As far as I am concerned, KDE 3.2 is still not officially certified for
running with Qt 3.3, is it? Anyway, Qt 3.3 should not go into Sarge, I
think.

> Since Martin Loschwitz has not kept the QT packages in a releasable state, 
> and indeed has (from what I've seen) not responded to requests for 
> information on why he has not updated and fixed bugs in the QT packages 
> (which are in need of both an update to 3.3.2 and fixes for many bugs, 
> including 2 RC) then perhaps it's time he relinquished those packages and 
> allowed someone with more time to take care of them. Technically, they 
> are already group maintained, so it shouldn't be a big deal to allow 
> others to come to the fore and make uploads (or pass them along to a DD 
> for uploading). Martin would still be welcome to contribute, of course.
> 
The thing is -- I was quite satisfied with Qt as it was (and still is), 
it is just that circumstances have changed (e.g. the new xcursor stuff
needs updating the package ...)

I didn't retire from maintaining them; I would, however, love to see
some people help me with it (specially since Ralf is on long-term-VAC
at the moment ...)

And no, Qt is not team-maintained and never has been. I never gave it
to the Qt/KDE Maintainers group because it is not specific to KDE and
some kind of distance between Qt and KDE should be kept up (so that 
other non-KDE-packages do not suffer because Qt becomes too much KDE
specific).

I think the solution this time is rather to find people to send me
patches; not to mix up people in a maintainer group.

As maintainer of the Qt packages, I hereby officially deny an NMU or
something similar, i.e. an upload not done by me, until things get
clear again.

However, as already said -- I would love to see people help me; I am
thinking of doing a Qt 3.2.x upload to fix at least one of the two 
outstanding release critical bugs. Additionally, re-enabling STL is
something one might take into consideration.

> Until this is formally accomplished, perhaps interested individiuals here 
> on debian-qt-kde could coordinate an upload. I myself don't have the 
> knowledge required to seriously fix such a complex package, but I'd be 
> willing to help in a non-central capacity.
> 
> Cheers,
> Christopher Martin
> 
> On June 1, 2004 04:26, Chris Cheney wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 10:07:47AM +0300, Marius Žalinauskas wrote:
> > > Tuesday 01 June 2004 03:43, Chris Cheney raš??:
> > > > time. I imagine that 3.2.3 will be available to packagers by the
> > > > time I get well enough to upload it.
> > >
> > > I wonder what Qt libs is it going to be linked? Current non-STL
> > > v3.2.3?
> >
> > It will be linked to whatever is in sid at that time. So if someone is
> > planning to change up Qt please do it soon. :)

-- 
  .''`.   Martin Loschwitz           Debian GNU/Linux developer
 : :'  :  madkiss@madkiss.org        madkiss@debian.org
 `. `'`   http://www.madkiss.org/    people.debian.org/~madkiss/
   `-     Use Debian GNU/Linux 3.0!  See http://www.debian.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: