Re: python-networkx_1.10-1_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into experimental
On October 5, 2015 8:42:40 PM EDT, Brian May <brian@microcomaustralia.com.au> wrote:
>On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 09:33 Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Except in this case you not only didn't but then got defensive when
>called
>> on it. If you'd just reacted with something like "Oops, made a
>mistake,
>> I'll
>> revert it from svn and ask for it to be removed from experimental."
>> (fortunately for experimental we can do that) then this wouldn't have
>been
>> a big deal.
>>
>
>I get the impression that the complaint was "process wasn't followed"
>as
>opposed to "I didn't want that package in experimental". So unless I am
>mistaken, there doesn't seem to be any need to remove the package from
>experimental. In this particular case.
I think that generally when one transgresses on someone else's package in a way the maintainer doesn't like it's the responsibility of the transgressor to offer to fix it.
It may well be that the maintainer would have declined the offer, but I think offering to return the situation to the status quo ante is appropriate.
Scott K
Reply to: