Re: When to get the upstream maintainer involved.

To: Bruce Perens <bruce@pixar.com>
Cc: pfaffben@pilot.msu.edu, debian-policy@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: When to get the upstream maintainer involved.
From: Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@rosebud.sps.queensu.ca>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 20:49:25 -0400 (EDT)
Message-id: <m0xNSVh-0000aHC@miles.econ.queensu.ca>
In-reply-to: <m0xNRx0-00IS1IC@golem.pixar.com>
References: <m0xNPuH-00J4hIC@golem.pixar.com> <m0xNRx0-00IS1IC@golem.pixar.com>

  Bruce> This is in response to a complaint from Ted Tso's, who is the
  Bruce> upstream maintainer of e2fsutils. He said that Red Hat takes care of
  Bruce> its own bugs, and we should as well. I have to agree with him.

File the complaintt under Debian haters. How many Debian-positive notes have
you seen from him ?

The upstream authors of my packages generally welcome bug reports.  Moreover,
they know their code way better than I do. I provide system integration
through packaging. But when the actual code fails, it is time for them to
look at it.

--
 edd@debian.org   http://rosebud.sps.queensu.ca/~edd   PGP KeyID 1024/6D7F08DD

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: When to get the upstream maintainer involved.
  - From: Jim Pick <jim@jimpick.com>

References:
- When to get the upstream maintainer involved.
  - From: bruce@pixar.com (Bruce Perens)
- Re: When to get the upstream maintainer involved.
  - From: bruce@pixar.com (Bruce Perens)

Prev by Date: Re: When to get the upstream maintainer involved.
Next by Date: When to get the upstream maintainer involved.
Previous by thread: Re: When to get the upstream maintainer involved.
Next by thread: Re: When to get the upstream maintainer involved.
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread