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

Re: KDE2 - nice demolition job ...

On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, erik wrote:

> >  Yep, I do -and it worked great before he had to repackage it. You could
> > have simply copied them from tdyc and had done with it.

Ok, this is where I have to voice my opinion as well...

First off, the packages WILL NOT build on Alpha (and possibly other
archs...not sure why as of yet), so simply copying them from the other
source may work for i386 (and you), but most likely will serve to piss off
someone other than you (like me, for instance).  Last I checked, Debian
supports multiple architectures, and sometimes that needs to be taken into
account before anyone says "just use those, they work fine".  Also,
maintainers will do what they will do.  Quite a few packages have taken
directions that I personally didn't care for, but that's the way things
go.  I assure you that very few of us decide spontaneously to restructure
our packages.  Usually, we do so in responce to more than a few requests
and/or bug reports.

Secondly, I think Ivan's been doing a fine job with getting KDE2 packaged
and reworking the stuff that he's already done.  I'll go a step further
and say that, had he not been kind enough to provide the KDE packages from
his site to begin with, you wouldn't be having this problem at all unless
you were running unstable and JUST installed KDE (like many of us are
either doing or trying to do, if we can get it to compile on our
arch).  Despite the fact that Ivan is a Debian maintainer, this does stir
up the argument as to whether or not Debian should be responsible for
packages offered by third parties (or breakage caused by said
packages).  I think we've settled this many times over in the past, as
have commercial companies who are asked about products not endorsed by
them: YMMV...call the person who made them, don't blame us.

To go on and on about the organisation of Debian and its shortcomings (in
your opinion) benefits no one and alienates those who may want to listen
to your ideas otherwise.  I always think it's a shame when things digress
to the level that this exchange has taken.  If possible, can you (and
everyone angered by the original message) take a deep breath and
relax?  I, for one, would like to hear some rational ideas for solutions
for the problems that you've encountered.  Perhaps, then, we can learn
what we can, implement what we think will work, throw out what we think
won't, and put this behind us so we can get some more work done.

> >  Didn't work for me. 

I'm sorry that the new maintainer process is such a headache.  While I
have nothing at all to do with NM (none whatsoever), I will offer an
apology for any hassles that you've encountered while in the process.  It
can be a mind-numbing experience, from what I hear, and one that's been
the point of endless arguments and flame wars in the past.

> >  I have written some - in fact I sat down and wrote a whole system to help
> > organize and automatically produce a documentation UI  specfically for
> > debian packages; it was summarily dismissed without, as far as I can tell,
> > anyone even looking at it.

I'd be interested in looking at it.  Honestly, this is the first I've
heard of such an effort.


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

Reply to: