Hey Pierre, hey everybody else, I now quote some lines I found pretty important for the whole discussion: Am Donnerstag, den 02.06.2005, 09:04 +0200 schrieb Pierre Habouzit: > A push method (wrt us) would be better than a pull (from us) one. > We have not time to pull. > we have bloated diffs, without *any* comments, and for packages like > ours, it's simply unusable. > Other methods are > nice, but really unusable when the package is a bit big, and that is > those package that often need the more help and need always more > manpower. I don't want to force my views on anybody else, but if I knew of a set of patches for my packages, I'd have a look every now and then (I might even script it) and in case of bigger changes, I'd try to get together with the maintainer to hear their views on it. Maybe his/her problem is mine and I didn't know yet. Ubuntu and other derivative maintainers _may_ have good reasons why they did things the way they did. And if time and manpower is the limiting factor, I see only one conclusion: collaboration! They are devoting their time on the same software - so why not call for a meeting and discuss the roadmap? The problem is absolutely no pull vs. push one. If you read the thread, you will see that mails, bugs, whatever are not the solution that suits everybody. Although there will hopefully be a solution that suits most of the people, if there can be an agreement. The only way to take the most out of this will be through collaboration and collaborate planning. Sorry, Pierre, for hijacking your post into this direction, this rather affects all the projects involved, not only KDE-QT. Have a nice day, Daniel
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part