On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 07:05:29PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: > On 09/07/2010 05:57 PM, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 11:40:09AM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote: > >> That I dont think it is. I think you not wanting t be bothered by > >> backports of your packages is quite an exception, > > I don't think it is. I have no problem with people backporting any of my > > packages that are useful to them, but I shouldn't have to read bug mail for > > them. I have enough bugs of my own. > Chances are good that htese bugs affect your package in testing, too. [citation needed] > Why ignore them? Instead you should be happy that your package receives > more testing. I was responding to the claim that maintainers not wanting to receive mail about backports of their packages that they weren't involved in was exceptional. I'm not interested in a discussion of how you think I "should" feel about such backports. Frankly, backports are no different than Ubuntu, Debian Edu, or Emdebian in this regard. It's great that such things exist and that people are finding other ways to put the Debian packages I maintain to use in other contexts besides those for which they were created; and it's also great when Debian maintainers collaborate with such derivers to make packages better for everyone. But when someone takes my package and uploads it somewhere other than the main Debian archive, they incur *all* the responsibilities of maintaining that package, including the responsibility of appropriately triaging bug reports and forwarding them to the maintainer when relevant. You don't get to decide that I should spend my limited Debian time triaging bugs for someone else's version of my package. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature