#include <hallo.h> * Steve Langasek [Thu, Aug 14 2003, 03:35:22PM]: > > * Since then no response from Ryan to mails/comment on bug report/... > > > Norbert has decided to upload gqview1.3 package in the archive. > > > I've tested both packages: gqview 1.3 has all 1.2 features, and add an > > exif support. Many people use it for months without problems. I think > > gqview 1.3 is ready for unstable ... > > Why would you NMU for a single wishlist bug? The above timeline doesn't Because: - it makes sense, it fits better in Gnome2 environment that we are going to put into Sarge - it has bugfixes and feature improvements - it has new features, wanted by users - it is stable in upstream code and in Debian matters, it _has_ already been tested by others, no need to use Debian Unstable for first-time tests - the freeze/release periods of upstream seam to clash with sarge. Do you really want to have a 3-4 year old upstream release when Sarge has been out for a while (say, 2005)? > point to any reason why it would be *necessary* to get the new version > of gqview into the archive. Which of the bugs currently listed in the > BTS are fixed by the new version of gqview? It is necessary from the point of view of users and other fellow developers; the "main" maintainer is the only showstopper, insisting on his "maintainer rights" but ignoring everyone else. IMO if we do not get answers, Ryan's ignorance implies a simple answer: Hijack this package! MfG, Eduard. -- Wie man sein Kind nicht nennen sollte: Chris Stollen
Attachment:
pgpj3MXkbsO4Z.pgp
Description: PGP signature