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

Re: Proposal for removal of mICQ package

On Sat, 15 Feb 2003 01:57, Cardenas wrote:
> > >This is under no circumstances acceptable behaviour from upstream.  Drop
> > >micq from Debian.
> Are you guys nuts? Upstream just wants their software to run
> optimally, and the maintainer refuses to do so. What's wrong with
> upstream informing users of the situation?

The upstream does not want their software to work optimally in Debian, if they 
did then they would not trojan it.

> > One more voice, mine: Drop the upstream author from the
> > new maintainer queue. Behaviour like this absolutely disqualifies
> > R?diger from being trusted, ever.
> Obviously, the upstream developer is interested in debian, and

Interested in sabotaging Debian.

> interested in making the package work right if he's willing to go down
> the long road of the NM queue. All we're doing is turning away a
> perfectly capable developer for a few printf's?

An example of dishonesty which he has not expressed any regret or remorse for.

http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/   My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/  Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/    Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/  My home page

Reply to: