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