On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 05:25:20PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 11:15:47AM +0100, Arno Töll wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On 28.10.2012 08:03, Philipp Kern wrote: > > > I'd prefer if such a tool could replace an existing one. Why not aim at > > > replacing dput if there's a reason for it? > > > > As for us, we'd welcome that. However, that's primarily left to the > > current dput maintainer and his interest in that. > > Have you talked to the dput maintainer? No. > > So if you don't have the original maintainer's agreement to call this > the "next generation" of their code, please be a bit more creative and > give it a different name. After all, that was also what the "dput" > maintainers did when they rewrote "dupload". It maintains the same interface and is backwards compatible. The change between dput and dupload was big enough where they were totally different ways of solving the problem. We support old arguments, and will make it a point to make sure old setups are still compatable. Cheers, Paul -- .''`. Paul Tagliamonte <paultag@debian.org> : :' : Proud Debian Developer `. `'` 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87 `- http://people.debian.org/~paultag
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature