Re: Bug#625865: ITP: ocportal -- ocPortal is a Content Management System for building and maintaining a dynamic website
On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 17:14 +0200, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 11:00 -0300, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> > On 05/06/2011 10:49 AM, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> > > What's up with the hate? It's always convenient to have a package in
> > > Debian, instead of hunting for it upstream. If it rots in Debian, then
> > > it can easily be removed again (or left in Unstable).
> > Wrong. Every additional package costs the whole Debian project in
> > numerous ways. That's why we have these discussions up front on all
> > ITPs, so objections can be voiced.
> Q: How many content management systems written in php does Debian need?
> A: How about zero?
> Not exactly helpful.
> That was before discussing if the guy filling the ITP mentioned his
> readiness to respond to any RC bugs.
I should probably point out that I am an upstream ocPortal developer, so
I should be as capable as anyone in fixing technical bugs, and as a
long-time Debian user I don't count Debian bugs as any less important
than core ocPortal bugs.
With this said, I'm obviously incapable of some things. As an example,
ocPortal uses "swfupload" which may require me to wait on ITP bug
#609110, although I don't mind taking over its packaging if its activity
has ceased (I'm not familiar with the protocol for handling such cases).