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

Re: Bugs about new upstream versions

On Sun, Feb 04, 2001 at 01:24:21PM +1100, Sam Johnston wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Feb 2001, David Starner wrote:
> > It's also extremely annoying to have
> > a package that you're forced to hand-compile because the Debian package
> > is being competently handled, especially when you're willing to take over
> > the package. 
> agreed. I regularly find myself hand compiling packages that aren't up to
> date. I'd be tempted to talk about the time it takes to package a new
> release in days or weeks rather than months too, especially given the
> length of the NM queue - if keeping up with releases isn't possible than
> maybe packages should be handed over to someone else. Is there a policy on
> this (yet)?

Are you mailing the maintainer with any patches you had to make, at least?

When you're hand compiling stuff, are you forward porting any Debian
specific patches, that might not be important for you, but are important
for others or on other architectures?

As maintainer of a few packages that need to be updated to new upstream
versions, actual help seems more useful than additional policy...


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
  do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
                      -- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)

Attachment: pgpgZ9p0sNZQ9.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: