Re: Announcing the availability of first Qt 3.3 packages
On June 15, 2004 18:27, Martin Loschwitz wrote:
> The only serious trouble in Qt3 until some days ago was that XCursor
> made it imposslbe to compile Qt3. Nothing else. You need to distinguish
> between "I think they are poorly maintained" and "they are poorly
> maintained".
I'm not qualified to judge how best to carve up the packages, but the
simple fact is that Qt3 was being poorly maintained. In fact, for all
intents and purposes, Qt was completely unmaintained, and that's not good
enough for a crucial package. You are no doubt aware that this isn't the
first round of openly expressed discontent with the state of Qt, since
you took it over. Generally, you seem to have an extremely lax conception
of what maintaining a package involves. Suffice it to say that frequent
updates, a lively interest and open communication on all your bugs,
careful attempts to meet user demands where at all possible, and an
immediate response to RC problems, are simply the bare minimum that
Debian demands, or should demand, of a maintainer. If you were too busy
and needed help, you should have asked for it a long time ago.
I've listed some of what needs to be fixed and improved in some of my
earlier posts in this thread. I'm sure others could list more. Your
latest packages are a great move in the right direction, and I thank you
for them, but a great deal remains to be done.
Christopher Martin
Reply to: