[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: gdm issues

(OK, so this is not directed at you Julien directly, your mail just
happened to come across me :) )

On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 12:44:15AM +0200, Julien wrote:
> I've got one packaged over Gnome2.6 libs (from experimental) :
> http://j.portalier.free.fr/
> binary & source are included. Binary might miss some features like LDAP,
> you might need to recompile it from source. It corrects the
> localized language bug too.

It seems Ryan is fixing the bugs, so the remaining issue is packaging
gdm for GNOME-2.6, right? What's holding up uploading (endorsed by the
GNOME team) gdm-2.6 packages to the alioth repository? We're doing this
for the Debian GNU/Hurd stuff for a couple years now, when we need to
hack around problems/maintainers in a way too ugly for ftp.debian.org.

There's only so much opposition you want to fight against. If the
maintainer is unwilling to cooperate, provide interested parties with an
alternative and let natural selection decide. Just try to keep the
version number reasonably low, so that upgrading to the official version
Will be easy eventually. And I guess iff you make it clear that they are
experimental and unofficial, I doubt Ryan would be mad.

And if all else fails, being able to say 'We've got high-quality gdm
packages up on alioth for half a year now which people are using with
great success, so we're going to upload them to main now' would be much
better than saying 'I'm going to NMU gdm tomorrow, I need to fix #foo
and neuro is unresponsive'.

Just IMHO.


Michael Banck
Debian Developer

Reply to: