On Sat, May 03, 2008 at 09:29:35AM +0000, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> >> Yes. But after I have seen Laszlo Boszormenyi bughandling in sqlite3, I
> >> think I actually would prefer current maintainance of gnupg.
> > Whatever it might have happened on those 2 bug reports, which I haven't
> > read, I find really annoying your public blaming behaviour.
> Didn't this thread by the way more or less start with public blaming of
> current gnupg maintainer?
Not really (IMO). It started with facts on the state of a package and on
the MIA status of its only maintainer. On the contrary you have been
speculating on the future (in)ability of someone to maintain gpg.
Anyhow, my post has probably been too rude and I'm sorry for that, but I
really don't think that yours was the way to go. First you need to give
Laszlo a chance, based on the fact that he started the hijack procedure,
not somebody else. Then, if you think the work is too much for just him
go and help. And quite frankly, starting as you did is probably not the
good way to set up the ground for synergistic collaboration: it will
just piss off people.
Yeah, people
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what?
zack@{upsilon.cc,cs.unibo.it,debian.org} -<%>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
(15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ? /\ All one has to do is hit the
(15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema \/ right keys at the right time
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature