On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 01:06:47PM +0100, Stephen Stafford wrote: > Okay, I'm now so pissed off with this, here's what's going to happen. > > If you (Christian) have not made a Maintainer upload by this time tomorrow, > fixing at least the trivial bugs of packaging (most of which can be done in > like 5 minutes each, by an inexperienced person -- You are supposed to be > competent), then I am going to take a package from one of the two > Non-maintainers who is interested, or encourage the maintainer who is > interested, and upload the fixed package with their name in the Maintainer > field. I have no time to work on it for days again... because I'm moving to a different work building our free software only company. > I have CCd all three of these people in case they aren't watching the buglog > closely or aren't subscribed to -devel (apologies if you guys get the mail > twice). CCd -devel so the flames can be properly targetted at me :) > > If none of those three have a fixed package then I'll temporarily make an > upload with my name in the Maintainer field (fixing whatever bugs I can as I > go) and pass it off to one or more of them when they have the time and skill > to take it. > > Note to the three: I'm more than happy to make uploads for those who can't > make them, help in whatever way I can (time permitting) with suggestions > and/or work. Make sure you integrate Jeff Bailey's patch for #200164, or > otherwise fix that bug (Jeff's patch looks pretty good to me though, and > he's far better at shell than I am :). I unfortunately just don't have the > available time to take this package long term. I'm hoping that one or a > combination of you three guys CAN. It's a nice package, and it deserves an > active maintainer Ok, please, take care of this upload as you like and I thank you. However, I cannot understand the change of Maintainer field. If you want to adopt it, it's right, but if you want to do only a single upload, you should make a NMU. What is the reason to put you or another guy as Maintainer if you have no intention to work on it again? > If you (Christian) severely object to this, then I suggest you get off your > arse and make a maintainer upload to fix some of the trivial long standing > bugs and look after your package properly. That's all I require from you to > not do this. Not really too difficult. Can I ask you to handle this upload as you think it's better? I hope I can gain again time for my packages and I'd like to work on it again... if you prefer to hijack it, please, find a people that can be able to adopt it and put his name as Maintainer. > If for some reason you've lost the ability to sign packages or make uploads > yourself, then I'll happily sign and/or upload whatever you provide. I can sign. And if you prefer, I can upload a new packages too, but I can't understand if there are different choices and different packages by several wannabe-surfraw-maintainer... I see different point of view again... about choices to "clean" surfraw package. Resuming, I can try already made new packages for surfraw, I can upload them, but I can't find to actually work on it from here to tomorrow... but I'll find soon... but if you prefer, hijack it and I will jave no problem to give my help for that package in future, even if I won't be the maintainer anymore. > Stephen bye Christian -- Christian Surchi, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org | ICQ www.debian.org - www.softwarelibero.it - www.firenze.linux.it | 38374818 You'll be called to a post requiring ability in handling groups of people.
Description: PGP signature