Em Qua, 2006-01-11 às 21:18 -0500, Joey Hess escreveu: > Gustavo Franco wrote: > > I agree with "similar things being said" but i'm yet to hear about the > > lack of collaboration and give Debian something back. For example: I > > don't remember too much people caring about PGI (Progeny) and after > > that anaconda "port" to say that they weren't contributing the > > installer efforts to us, even when d-i was already there. > > FWIW, progeny uploaded pgi to Debian (I forget if it ever made it out of > incoming) and have contributed back other tools like pickaxe too (pity > we haven't tried to use it and are still stuck with the Evil that is > debian-cd). I think it was pretty clear by the time their anaonda port > came around that Debian was not very interested it it except possibly as > a fallback if d-i failed to materialize. Though they failed to contribute some stuff, like the GNOME debconf frontend, which we ended up porting back to Debian ourselves, even though the versions for debconf in Progeny and Debian were already quite far from each other. It was, in some ways, a kind of 'utnubu'. I still think we didn't gave as much attention to the Progeny stuff as we should. One of the differences in context here is that we are paying attention to what Ubuntu is doing. Perhaps it's because it is indeed drawing lots of attention from everyone, or because the scale of what they're doing exceeds what Progeny did or does, and ends up affecting everyone in some way. Now, Progeny has given lots back, and Ubuntu has been of help in the Xorg and gcc4 transitions; we're also taking advantage of some of he work they did while packaging newer gnome versions when we do our own packages, the same goes for some improvement they're doing to apt, synaptic. I mean, we can complain they aren't doing as much as they're claiming (I won't be able to tell for sure, I'm not paying attention to the PR) but they are actually doing some very nice contribution in a lot of ways, like Progeny did and does. Having said that, I'd also like to have non-ubuntu-specific patches be fed to our BTS; that would really make me feel there's a strong policy of giving back. While my relationship with people at ubuntu working on gksu is quite good, I still have to look for patches manually sometimes, like David Nusinow mentioned, and I have found patches that improved debian's gksu this way at least twice. It would have been much better to have them filed to the BTS. See ya, -- kov@debian.org: Gustavo Noronha <http://people.debian.org/~kov> Debian: <http://www.debian.org> * <http://www.debian-br.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Esta =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=E9?= uma parte de mensagem assinada digitalmente