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

Advice with uncooperative maintainers


I'm seeking advice on dealing with uncooperative maintainers.  I had some
trouble trying to cooperate with Ryan Murray to fix bugs in his packages.

On 1 Aug 2004, I sent a wishlist bug report to the 'esound' package, with
an attached patch that fixed the problem.  I noticed that Ryan is not
actively maintaining this package, so I informed him that I intended to NMU
it in case no activity from his part happened in 7 days.

On 9 Aug 2004 (8 days later), with no response from him, I NMUed esound with
my patch.  He inmediately came back from MIA-ness and sent me a private mail
basicaly telling me that my NMU wasn't appreciated, and that it was a waste
of time in cycles for the buildds.

Roughly 12 hours later, he reverted the changes.  He didn't tell me he was
going to revert them whatsoever.  He just uploaded and I casualy noticed
about it while looking at the incoming queue:

> esound (0.2.29-2) unstable; urgency=low
>   * Instead of using select() for OSS, use SNDCTL_DSP_GETOSPACE.
>   * Revert changes in unsanctioned NMU.
>  -- Ryan Murray <rmurray@debian.org>  Mon,  9 Aug 2004 20:28:59 -0700

Also, he removed all trace of my upload in the debian/changelog file.

What am I supposed to do on this?  Bring the issue to the technical committe?
Speak with the DPL? (As the tech ctte documentation suggests). I'll appreciate
any constructive feedback on this.

_PLEASE_ note that in this mail I'm only describing _FACTS_, not opinions.
So before you start your attempt at justifying Ryan's behaviour, think twice
and send it to /dev/null, where it belongs.

Robert Millan

(Debra and Ian) (Gnu's Not (UNiplexed Information and Computing System))/\
(kernel of *(Berkeley Software Distribution))

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: