Re: maint-guide et other lost children
Osamu Aoki <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 05:18:29PM -0500, Adam Di Carlo wrote:
>> Can you explain why you don't consider developers-reference active?
>> If it's lack of commits that seems rather hypocritical since I'm not
>> even capable of doing them right now!
> I thought they are maintained here as the official upstream. Even if it
> is not updated due to resource limitation, I think this source tree is
> active as long as this is the upstream of key document.
> Dead tree is tree with nothing significant. Some tree has build-able
> SGML files with no real content. I call them dead.
> Or am I wrong for assessing the situation?
Completely wrong. DDP CVS *is* the upstream version. That's why I'm
so screwed right now, since I don't have any way to update the package
or even work on it with the benefit of CVS.
How did you reach the conclusion it's a dead tree?
.....Adam Di Carlo....email@example.com.....<URL:http://www.debian.org/>