Re: Considerations for 'xmms' removal from Debian
Don Armstrong <don <at> debian.org> writes:
> There's little that can be done to educate or placate zealots; but
> considering that everyone is talking about transitioning to audacious,
> not advertising (heh; amusing that someone thinks we have PR) adacious
> as an xmms clone.
I don't think debian has PR, however I think debian can choose how
to handle a migration in a way where it's not harmful to audacious as
upstream from debian.
> In general, bug reports should be filed against the Debian package.
> The Debian maintainer is more than capable of discerning whether the
> bug is due to a custom modification present in Debian only, or whether
> it exists upstream, and forwarding the bug appropriately.
So then you are saying we should reject all bugs against audacious as
provided by debian which do not refer to a debian bugtracker URL
anyway? I'll certainly be happy to implement that.
> That's really a matter of maintainers working closely with upstream
> developers. Rather than this mailing list the person you should be
> coordinating with and talking to is Adam Cécile. [Hopefully you were
> already aware that he is the audacious maintainer.]
Adam has commit access to our repository. I do indeed trust his
judgement, but if he decides to orphan the package, then we have a
problem. If he is put in a position where there are 11000 xmms users
left without a package taking their angst out on him, he may not feel
like maintaining the package anymore. That's human nature, you know.