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

Re: Bug#167921: ITP: httrack -- offline browser : copy websites toyour computer

>>"Steve" == Steve Langasek <vorlon@netexpress.net> writes:

 Steve> The question "why do we need another one?" should always be
 Steve> asked, and unless there are problems with the functionality
 Steve> provided by the existing package, "I don't want to use that
 Steve> one" is a piss-poor excuse for expanding the archive.

 >> I strongly disagree. It is the best reason for expanding the
 >> archive: at least oneperson has had an itch to scratch despite the
 >> existence of a perfectly working alternative (for most people windows
 >> works well enough, for the rest there are the bsd's, who the hell
 >> needs Linux? And who the hell needs anything more than Red Hat and
 >> Suse?).

 Steve> "I don't want to use that one" IS a piss-poor excuse, because
 Steve> it's totally unreasoning.  I don't think we're raising the bar
 Steve> too high if we require maintainers to have some concrete
 Steve> reason for adding a new package -- even personal, subjective
 Steve> reasons are ok.

	That is a contradiction. Either  personal, subjective reasons
 are ok -- or they are not.  "I don't want to use that one" IS a
 personal, subjective reason. 

 If you want your program to be readable, consider supplying the
 argument. --Larry Wall in the perl man page
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: