On Thu, Oct 21, 1999 at 09:47:28AM +0200, Christian Kurz wrote:
> Maybe, but it' still an NMU, only if it's for one architecture. Please
> kepp this in mind. And if you make a NMU, it doesn't matter what kind
> of, you first have to contact the maintainer about this.
I always contact the maintainer first. But I do not want to wait an eternit=
y=20
until I can do the upload. Sure, I can wait a week. But if there is a=20
release critical bug in the package, the maintainer did not do an upload=20
in the last months, did not fix any bugs and never answered to the report=
=20
I will do the upload and tell him about it.=20
Perhaps this is rude but I think if we want to have a high quality
distribution this must be okay.=20
Problem is that every maintainer seems to take an NMU as offense. So I am=
=20
not allowed to help - the only thing I can to is to submit the patch to the
BTS (which might be a one-liner) and wait what happens. My work was useless=
=20
since the maintainer will probably change the line himself and never need=
=20
the patch.=20
> This isn't okay for me. If I don't get a notice of the NMU and the
> maintainer, who wants to do the NMU, waits long enough, I will be angry
> and will definitely tell him that. And just because you have been away
So sometime you might need to tell me that you are angry. That's life.=20
It's better than doing nothing. Up to today nobody complained about the=20
uploads I did.=20
> for a week, nobody is allowed to NMU, without notifying and asking you
> if it's okay.=20
Of course I will not do an upload to fix a typo or something. But if it is=
=20
something grave I will not wait if I know that the maintainer is MIA. If=20
I can get in touch I will of course do so.
Let's kill this thread - you have your opinion of this and I have mine.=20
I don't think discussion will get us any further. Debian used to be a=20
bazaar style project and if I can do something to improve our distribution=
=20
I will do so.
Thanks
Torsten
Attachment:
pgpAEobr1S5kz.pgp
Description: PGP signature