On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 22:59 +0100, Guus Sliepen wrote: > On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 09:10:21PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > > On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 02:02:08AM -0600, William Pitcock wrote: > > > > > > > > What does this have over PowerDNS? > > > > > > Probably nothing, else that I am using it and packaging it for my own > > > and thought that it would be a good idea to contribute to Debian, is > > > redundancy a problem ? > > > > Even if you're a perfectly responsible maintainer, a new package still > > requires some work by ftpmaster, the release team, possibly the security team, > > and so on. It also increases the number of options a user has to choose > > between. If the package is redundant, this is a waste of their time. > > If it is really redundant then it is also a waste of upstream's time. William, > since you're trying to package it, could you compare it in detail to PowerDNS, > and if there is really little difference, try to see if both upstreams can work > together and merge their efforts? That would help everyone in the end. > It's not me who is trying to package it, but Sylvain Rochet. William
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part