On Mar 05, Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> wrote: > > By saying that these obsolete drivers should be supported anyway you are > > basically requesting other people to spend their time maintaining > > workarounds in their own packages. > Well, we have done this for sarge in a much more extensive way when all we had > was discovery to work with. Udev beeing a very important piece of software > which is the cause of many troubles recently, and given that you are unwilling > to support such backward compatible fixes, i suppose this probably means that > you would be willing to accept a (or various) comaintainers who would be > willing to maintain those workarounds. This is just not true, the udev package contains multiple workarounds for broken drivers, starting from ide.agent and vio.agent. I would not mind receiving help with udev either, but with a few notable exceptions most people just talk without writing code, and often do not even know what they are talking about. > All that is asked is that you don't oppose such workaround to be implemented. I have no such plan. Just do not expect to implement hacks in my own packages unless there is a timeline for their replacement with proper fixes. -- ciao, Marco
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature