Re: Debian communication and attitude [was: Re: Example of really nasty DD behavior]
On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 12:14:38PM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> On 2003-11-15 17:37 -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 11:55:46PM +0100, Duck wrote:
> > > I was writing an ITP when you posted that and suddendly, saw all my
> > > work preparation turned into ashes.
> >
> > Duck, perhaps you should have written the ITP earlier.
>
> Why should he? If writing an ITP as the very first action is what you
> think best, then do it like this, but that doesn't mean that everybody
If you don't write the ITP first, you run the risk of somebody else
duplicating your work! Exactly what happened here. It's not the other
guy's fault, he's not psychic. If whoever was first to look at it had
posted an immediate ITP, the duplicate would've been avoided.
> What do you complain about? You get a DD approved package either way
> since the sponsor is required to check the package.
Yes. But who looks after the package when the non-maintainer goes MIA?
At least we have some traceability with DDs. Not that they don't
disappear too of course.
If Duck wants to become a developer then the time spent working on this
package isn't wasted, it would've been good practice at creating a
package. Now if he could just start to post on this list with his real
name ...
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@debian.org> <hamish@cloud.net.au>
Reply to: