Re: lprng as 'stantard' package (was: Re: Test packages for libc6 2.1.91+cvs)
Is there a formal procedure to put a package in standard? cupsys could
go to standard as well.
Craig Small writes:
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2000 at 06:58:20PM -0300, Henrique M Holschuh wrote:
> > Still, if you'd rather have lpr/lpd as "extra", LPRNg would have to be
> > changed to "standard" so that UNIX network-aware printing services are
> > available in the standard install. The LPRNg maintainer (added by me to cc:
> > list) might want to say something about this.
> I am the current maintainer of LPRng for Debian. I already have
> packages that appear in standard or higher (procps appears on boot
> floppies) so I know about what happens there.
> LPRng could go into standard, its reasonably stable except for the last
> month or so (and that appears in the unstable dist). I still not exactly
> happy with the post/pre inst/rm scripts but they should be largely stable.
> I have a reasonably good working relationship with the upstream
> maintainer Patrick Powell and he does actively maintain LPRng. Actually
> he's probably my best upstream maintainer, even including packages where
> I am that upstream!
> I don't really care either way what is decided, of course when someone
> does decide let me know. I'll go buy that extra 18 G hard disk for the
> incoming bug mail :)