Re: negative vote for maintainer Michael Gilbert
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Emil wrote:
> I would like to know how can you give a negative vote for a maintainer
> who neglects serious bugs in the packages he's supposed to look after.
> Michael Gilbert <email@example.com> ignores a serious bug
> #641873 in package xpdf for the last 3 months. xpdf is the only
> linux lean and fast alternative PDF viewer and it is broken in Debian.
> The bug is only present with the debian patches so he's the only person
> who can fix this.
> The same xpdf package also has bug #640515 also 3 months old - xpdf
> segfaults when printing.
> I wonder why is the xpdf package included in this shape in Debian at all
> if you can't view text and can't print.
> Other exaples of unsolved bugs: #622877 from 15 April 2011 (xpdf can't
> print landscape documents); this one is from the time you could still
> print in xpdf.
> So I would like to know what is the process to vote out a maintainer
> if he doesn't step aside and lets someone who is interested in
> maintaining his own packages.
I'm really at a loss for words here. I'll just say that the xpdf
testing package is currently 100% RC bug-free , and that's the one
that matters. Unstable is, well, unstable, yikes!
I've done my due diligence by intentionally blocking those issues from
contaminating my testing package. At present, I have limited time for
xpdf, although at some point, yes, I will need to sit down and make
the time. Until then, the testing package is working just fine;
please be patient.
I'm also more than willing to accept any and all help from interested
contributors such as yourself. These are issues ripe for playing
around with in a debugger; for those that enjoy that type of thing.
Oh, and besides that, there are 1,000 other RC bugs to worry about
right now; most of them actually affecting testing ;) Why is xpdf so