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

Re: What doing with an uncooperative maintainer ?



On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 11:01:54AM +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
> * Steve Langasek <vorlon@netexpress.net> wrote:
> > Why would you NMU for a single wishlist bug?

> That's not the answer to Sebastians question.

> > The above timeline doesn't point to any reason why it would be
> > *necessary* to get the new version of gqview into the archive.

> It isn't. There are some nice features in the new version. It's called
> "beta", but runs very stable.

So there are no non-wishlist bugs that would be fixed by the new upload
-- just the addition of new features?  That would suggest that the new
upstream release is buggier than the current one.

If there are non-wishlist bugs fixed by the new upstream release, has
this been documented in the BTS?  (I.e., has an attempt been made to
point this out to Ryan?)

It's my impression that Ryan is atypically hostile towards NMUers;
however, the case here for an NMU, at least as it's been presented to
this mailing list, doesn't seem very strong.  It would be better to have
the issues concretely documented in the BTS before attempting to hijack.
Maybe the reasons why the new upstream is so much better than the
current package are obvious to you -- they're certainly not obvious to
me.

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: pgpiMnBEJwyDG.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: