Re: upstreams maintainer conflict, was: wget: remove outdated manual page

[Nicolás Lichtmaier <nick@feedback.net.ar>]

> >Actually I believe he is being completely unreasonable by asking for
> >something written from scratch. He is certainly entitled to press for the
> >correct authorship information though.
> 
>     Actually, what's being requested is that that the manpage not be
> based upon a manpage known to be outdated and inaccurate.  I suspect
> that if a manpage was written or converted based upon the current info
> documents, there wouldn't be a problem.

 And you also wrote this:

>     2) The maintainer has presented the excuse that since removing the
>        manpage leads to a bug in the package, it shouldn't be done.
>        My statement was pointing out that the fact that the manpage is
>        out of date is a bug in any case, so the package has at least
>        one bug whether or not the manpage is removed, and that
>        shouldn't be a consideration.  He can deal with a bug about a
>        removed or inadequate manpage, or he can deal with a bug about
>        an outdated manpage, but either way it's a bug, and it needs to
>        be fixed, preferably by providing an accurate, up-to-date
>        manpage based upon the current info documentation.
> 

 I'm glad to see that you agree with me on all this. It's just that you
don't know the facts. Read the manpage, read the info docs, and then we can
continue this discussion.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org