Re: RFS: xboard
Florian Ernst wrote:
>
> However, I'd greatly welcome if some more meaningful changes /
> improvements were applied, especially since I've seen people who did
> nothing else but claiming a package by sticking their name to it, who
> then didn't respond to bugs or package a new upstream release for
> years, yet still proudly put "Debian maintainer" in their résumé.
> Of course, this doesn't need to apply to you at all, but I personally
> prefer to see contributions instead of claims.
>
>
Well, since /"proudly putting "Debian maintainer" in my résumé"/ is not
going to earn me any tangible benefits, we can assume that is not what
I'm after. ;-) Both the new Maintainers' Guide, the web pages, and the
Mentors FAQ recommend starting by adopting one of the WNPP packages,
which is exactly what I'm trying to do. And, as far as I know, just
putting my name on a package doesn't make me a Debian
Maintainer/Developer anyway - I would need to show at least some history
of good submissions and timely bug fixes.
As far as I know, there is only one outstanding bug with xboard - the
one dealing with 8-bit color XPM issues. I haven't tried to reproduce it
yet, neither do I know [yet] how to fix it and whether the current code
will allow it at all. BTW, what's the policy about bugs/features that
are so deeply ingrained in the code that fixing would require a
significant rewrite? Are such bugs supposed to stay active even if
upstream author is not interested in rewriting the program?
Thanks for the tip on Sid. I don't recall any specific information about
the development environment from the "beginner's" documents mentioned
above, so I assumed it could be Sarge. Will setup Sid then.
So, anyway, should I go ahead and take responsibility over xboard (which
would not make it worse) or should I not bother and leave the package as
orphaned?
Regards,
--
Alexander L. Belikoff http://www.belikoff.net
PGP/GPG fingerprint: 907E E5C6 7BA7 195A 5B38 0DD4 E14F 9428 C03A 787A
(http://pgp.mit.edu for the key)
Reply to: