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

Re: Excessive wait for DAM - something needs to be done



"Matt Ryan" <mryan@debian.org> writes:

> Steve Langasek asked:
>>Are you saying that you intend to go on record as sponsoring this NM,
>>not on grounds of familiarity with his work, but because you're opposed
>>to the existence of a central authority that decides who is given
>>developer access?
>
> Based on what was originally stated about the list archives providing proof
> of why they shouldn't be allowed to be a developer - yes. In a subsequent
> private email I have been told that problems are apparent with the 'quality'
> of the packaging which I'm planning to investigate before moving forward.
> What happens next depends on this investigation but if it turns out to be a
> difference of opinion rather than a deep technical problem than I'll go on
> record and sponsor.

Maybe your time would be better spent checking the quality of your own
package first.

Now running lintian...
W: ssmtp source: ancient-standards-version 3.1.1.1
E: ssmtp: control-file-has-bad-permissions conffiles 0400 != 0644
E: ssmtp: control-file-has-bad-permissions preinst 0555 != 0755
E: ssmtp: control-file-has-bad-permissions postinst 0555 != 0755
E: ssmtp: control-file-has-bad-permissions postrm 0555 != 0755
E: ssmtp: control-file-has-bad-permissions config 0555 != 0755
E: ssmtp: control-file-has-bad-permissions templates 0555 != 0644
W: ssmtp: no-section-field
W: ssmtp: no-priority-field
Finished running lintian.

-- 
Poems... always a sign of pretentious inner turmoil.

Attachment: pgpTb8Vs8HyeE.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: