[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: divergence from upstream as a bug

On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 12:03:17PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Do you have a proposal for a remplacement of the glibc then?

> And note we *do* forward patches we apply to the Debian Glibc, which is
> not always something pleasant to do, especially when it concerns
> "embedded crap" [1]: at best your patch is ignored, at worst you get
> insults.

Has using eglibc.org as upstream been considered? Forking is a valid
option when upstream is as hostile and unco-operative as glibc's is.

> That's why I personally don't want another level of administrative task
> like proposed by Joey Hess, which won't improve things in that case.

It seems very debian way - fix collaboration problems with policies
and bureacracy..

I would propose that maintainers can suggest alternative
collobarion models with upstream as well. Such as maintaing the delta
against upstream in VCS branch of upstream, maintaining a policy that
packager will only include patches that are already in committed upstream
VCS, or extreme cases declaring that the debian packaging is a fork of

"rm -rf" only sounds scary if you don't have backups

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: