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

Re: Bits from the FTPMaster meeting

Le Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 12:42:47AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
>         I beg to differ. This sounds like a maintainer that is not
>  providing the support for their package, and needs to  orphan that
>  package; not building on some architecture is often a symptom of
>  problems elsewhere as well. I am not sure we ought to support
>  maintainers that are neglectful of their packages.

You are member of the technical comittee, which means that I should trust your
experience. I want you and this list to understand that I take your advice to
orphan my packages very seriously. For the programs I am interested in, I do
not share Debian's goal to make them run on all existing platforms we support.

Trust me, it is not only to save my time, but also because I do not want my
packages to be a burden to the communauty. It is my experience that for
bioinformatics packages, when a bug is found by the buildd network on an
unsupported architecture, neither upstream nor the porters show much interest
for it. I do not mean this as a criticism, since I share this point of view
that there is better to do than fixing those bugs.

Luk suggested to use an unofficial upload system and indeed I have been
browsing the documentation of Ubuntu's personnal package archive and signed
their code of conduct recently. The only problem is that their PPAs do not
build the packages against Lenny or Sid, but actually it would not be a problem
for many of the users of my packages, because apparently they are Ubuntu users…

I am of course pleased to see my work re-used, but I would be even more pleased
if people would use Debian Med. To attract more users, we need a good release
and good medical packages. I do think that not speding time on porting some
of our bioinformatics packages would help the two sides of the coin.

Have a nice day,

Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan

Reply to: