On Wed, 2004-08-11 at 20:16, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 11:41:28PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: > > > > Two more options: > > > Hijack (which would be hijacked back imediatly I guess) or upload a > > > new package under a different name. > > > > Hint: this package is maintained by a ftp-master ;-) > > Are you suggesting that an ftp-master is going to abuse his role to > veto a package he doesn't approve of? If that happens we have a larger > problem that some pitty sound server not working... I don't think he is insinuating that. I do believe that JM is referring the levity of doing an NMU, is much more grave when an ftp-master is the one that you are NMU'ing is one o'is packages. Best make sure all the "eyes" dotted, "tees" crossed and follow the proscribed route. Of course this is all conjecture, at least I really _hope_ it is. -- greg, greg@gregfolkert.net The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part