On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 06:22:13PM +0100, Eike Sauer wrote: > The discussion doesn't seem to be very productive any more. > Time to come to a compromise? > > Obviously, Robert is not going to retreat. He doesn't need to, he can be slapped down. > OTOH, most people (publicly) stating anything about his ITP > had objections against the package as a whole or the name > or missing features or other things. This is a mischaracterisation. Debian developers are usually good at avoiding making excessive duplicate comments; in this case, there were a lot of minor issues and misfeatures, and a few showstoppers. Given these two things together, you can expect to see more mails about the minor issues, simply because it takes more eyes to spot them all. We don't ignore minor issues just because there are major ones. That doesn't excuse the showstoppers. These are two big ones, off the top of my head: - this packages adds nothing, and would occupy a fair chunk of space in the archive. The "advantages" cited were rapidly debunked and no more were given. - this package cannot be safely upgraded (without forcing a reboot). The latter prohibits it from being in a Debian release. The former should keep it out of the archive entirely. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature