On 12-05-07 at 11:28pm, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sun, May 06, 2012 at 09:49:11PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > On 12-05-06 at 10:22am, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > On Sat, May 05, 2012 at 03:07:27AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > > We have until now maintained Nodejs only in unstable because > > > > requests to rename axnode was met with either silence or refusal > > > > with the reasoning that axnode was more widely used in Debian > > > > than Nodejs. > > > > > Obviously Nodejs is not widely used in Debian when initially > > > > packaged. So I've simply waited until it was really sensible to > > > > make such comparison of popularity among the users of Debian. > > > > Which seems to be the case now - even if still impaired by > > > > Nodejs only offered to our users of unstable and experimental > > > > Debian. > > > > I find this response from you *very* disappointing. It implies > > > that you knew that you had a responsibility to rename the Nodejs > > > binary according to Policy, but that rather than acting in a > > > timely manner to persuade upstream of the importance of renaming, > > > you decided to wait until momentum was on your side so that you > > > could have an outcome in your favor. > > > No, that is not what it means. You are reading timings into it that > > I did not write there, and you are reading those timings wrong! > > Ok, sorry for the misunderstanding. That certainly is what I took > from your statement that you were waiting until it was "sensible" to > compare popularity, but it seems I misunderstood. Your certainty is not flawed: That wasn't the detail you misunderstood. I talked about waiting internally in Debian, you (in my understanding) lectured me about relationship with upstream. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature