Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n
Quoting Branden Robinson (branden@debian.org):
> I trust you're aware of the massive rearrangement of the XKB data in
> 4.3.0, which is why I haven't been applying much in the way of XKB data
> patches. Well, no, you probably weren't. That would require reading
> the traffic on the debian-x mailing list, wouldn't it?
Which is pretty impossible for someone (like Denis) who's involved in
a lot of other matters.
I've re-read this whole thread, just for trying to understand why you
guys are fighting.
Besides the usual effect or e-mail exchanges amplifying arguments, it
seems that all involved parties are in fact people who are strongly
commited to Debian, in various part. All of you (this includes me
also) have probably reached the point where you cannot take more work
even though you would want to.
Branden, you mostly say Denis "come help and discuss i18n patches in
deban-x, I lack time for properly do the whole work".
Denis (and Kubota-san, also AFAIK), you ask Branden to change his
policy about patches, which more or less asking him more work,
indirectly (as a consequence of errors triggered one day or another by
bad patches).
I think everybody has good intentions here, but probably different
points of view. Please continue to remember this and do no jump into a
useless flamewar.
The solution to this problem is probably by finding more and more
manpower for maintaining our packages and all stuff we want to
progress in Debian.
If we lack manpower, we have to make sacrifices, which is always hard
to accept for people who accept them.
All people involved here are good people, don't forget it when
thinking about throwing knifes to each other.
This was my "peace and love" minute (I'm a 70's man..... :)). Thanks
for listening.
As you may see, I have no solution for your xterm problem. It will
maybe fix in sarge, if all parties agree on a solution. It will maybe
be fixed later, it it appears impossible to do something else.
Sarge will never be perfect. Just try to make it as perfect as possible...
Reply to: