Re: DFSG-violations and NEW and DFSG-violations and I would fix them, but...
On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 10:57 +0300, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> Reinhard Tartler <email@example.com> writes:
> > With "Like this" I mean packages that have been held back in NEW for a
> > very long time without response or REJECTED with an reason not
> > acceptable to the maintainer? Does mediating this kind of issues fall
> > under the authority of the TC, or should they be escalated rather to the
> > DPL?
> Well, if a package is in NEW for a long time, that's something that
> really cannot be mediated, as it probably means that none of the
> ftpmasters (or assistants) have had the time to look into it (meaning
> it is very likely a very complex package with licensing issues), and
> no authority in Debian can force any project member to do work the
> member doesn't want to do.
> If a package is REJECTED with a reason the maintainer thinks is
> invalid, I think the first step should be to tell the ftpmaster (as a
> group) the reasons. It is always possible that a ftpmaster (as a
> person) has made a mistake.
Indeed, I recently actually had this happen to me. An upload that I made
was rejected by an FTP Master (for convenience copies of code) - when I
pointed out to the FTP master the reason(s) why this was there (was
actually modified from upstream, debian didn't have the latest package,
the latest packages had huge API changes, etc etc) - he was happy to let