On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 12:02:23PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Does it fail to comply with policy? I fail to see why code forked from a
> > Debian package, core or otherwise, is any less worthy of inclusion that
> > any other forked code - of which we have lots.
>
> Forking our own packages makes us look like noncooperative fools.
....
You mean we're NOT noncooperative fools? It seems that far too much
requires the blessing of a select person or group of people to get done in
this project. How many times have we witnessed bug terrorism where two
maintainers refuse to agree as to the status of a bug? How many times
have important problems been ignored because we cannot agree on any
reasonable solutions for it? This sort of thing happens all the time.
A package or two demonstrating this is embarassing, but no more so than
the BTS or the archives of this mailing list.
Not allowing the package into the archive is not going to solve the
problem, just fix one symptom. As to this particular package, I think if
it is needed, the changes should go into apt. If the changes not upto
Culus' standards, then they need to get there. ie, cooperation is
necessary at some point, and that's what's missing.
--
Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@bluecherry.net> Certified free software nut
"Debian: no hats or reptiles were harmed in the making of this distribution."
-- Paul Slootman
Attachment:
pgpPdrLz2mLfn.pgp
Description: PGP signature