Re: Advice with uncooperative maintainers
On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 03:04:39PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 12-Aug-04, 10:04 (CDT), Robert Millan <email@example.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 10:20:45AM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > > Obviously these bugs are important to you, but not everyone else will
> > > place them at the same priority level.
> > That's totaly correct. (And this is what NMUs are for).
> Ah, no, they are not. They are for doing something that the maintainer
> would do if zie had the time, and that fixes a significant bug. They are
> not for implementing random wishlift stuff.
I don't take my wishlist reports from /dev/random. Even though most of the
wishlist bugs I have sent lately are FTBFS bugs, feature requests are also a
valid reason to NMU if the maintainer doesn't object to them.
I would say that even cosmetical changes are ok for an NMU, provided that the
maintainer doesn't object to them (But I don't have interest in filing such
bugs, let alone interest to NMU).
(Debra and Ian) (Gnu's Not (UNiplexed Information and Computing System))/\
(kernel of *(Berkeley Software Distribution))