Re: LSB 3.0 and who's doing what?
Ian Murdock writes...
> I don't think that's Jeff's position, and it's certainly not mine
I didn't mean Progeny in particular, although re-reading my mail I could see
how it could be interpreted that way, sorry about that.
> (read my blog for my thoughts on issues such as this).
I do. :)
> I think Jeff's comment just reflects the reality that not
> all of our work is accepted into the original project we
> diverged from, even when we submit it (which we
> have done), and perhaps a bit of frustration about that.
Are there things you have a good reason for adding to a Debian package and the
maintainer refuses to accept? I guess you could bring it up on debian-devel or
worse case the technical committee?
Some of the LSB changes are things we all agree shouldn't yet be in the Debian
versions of the packages, for example the i18n changes (since they aren't
upstream). Those I think should live elsewhere (although a pointer to that
elsewhere in the README.Debian of the official package might be nice).
--
Matt Taggart
taggart@debian.org
Reply to: