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

Re: Example of really nasty DD behavior

Scripsit Hamish Moffatt
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 01:27:33AM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:

> > Another possibility is that one only actually decides that one is
> > willing to maintain the package in Debian after having *done* a
> > workable first approximation to packaging and found no monsters
> > lurking in the makefiles.

> One could always file an ITP and chance it to an RFP if the package
> turned out to be lemon. If "locking" the package is really the intent
> then it seems logical to file the ITP as soon as possible.

Yes, but must "locking" be the intent? I fail to see anything wrong
with doing one's personal deliberations *without* preventing others
from doing so in parallel.

If other people don't want *their* work to go to waste, by all means
let them file an ITP before doing wasteable work, and change it to RFP
if it turns out to be naught. But if I'm okay with being beaten to the
finish line and willing to consider my efforts a learning experience,
I can see no reason to acquire a lock on the package before I'm
prepared to defend the package on debian-legal and/or to the

Henning Makholm                     "The practical reason for continuing our
                                  system is the same as the practical reason
                          for continuing anything: It works satisfactorily."

Reply to: