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

Re: dsniff is dead, long life to dsniff

Luciano Bello wrote:
> 	I'm the dsniff[1] maintainer, which is a pretty dead project[2]. Dug
> Song (the upstream) is putting his efforts in rewrite the project in
> python[3], which is quite limited compared to the previous one.
> 	The question is: should I package this new version as a replacement
> of the previous one, even one there is a big reduction in the feature
> list? Or, should I create a new package (let's say, python-dsniff) and
> RM dsniff?
Dug has gave me his permission and blessing to adopt dsniff (as in, the
upstream), keeping the original name.

It has been a while (= 2 years) since I was in that discussion -- I was
 the Debian maintainer back then, had ported dsniff to libnet 1.1 from
1.0 and wanted all these debian/patches to be merged upstream. He
mentioned the Python version back then too FWIW.

I am lacking free time but if anyone else is up to it (Luciano?), I'd
happily collaborate to maintain the original project.

In any case, I think that keeping the same name for the Python version
would be a mistake.


Reply to: