Bug#278810: Bug#305287: ITP: slony1 -- Slony-I is a "master to multiple slaves" replication system with cascading and failover.
Hello,
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 09:29:28PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Of course, it'd be good to *read* the RFP bug before retitling it, etc,
> which would have provided you with the information I wrote about in my
> prior email- specifically that there's a number of other people working
> on slony packaging already and there's specific and good reasons why it
> hasn't already been uploaded to the archive.
It's unfortunate that I mis-typed the version number. I meant to file an
ITP for Slony1-1.1.0, and not Slony1-1.1.1. This version of Slony will not
require the postgresql source tree to build.
Perhaps there are a bunch of people still working to package Slony1-1.0.5
(it's not clear to me one way or another from the bug report). I do know
that Oliver doesn't have time for it, as he's told me this himself. I'm
not interested in packaging that version anyway, I want to package
Slony1-1.1.0. Are there a bunch of people working on packaging this version
also? Again, it's not clear from the existing bug report who's working on what.
My ITP for Slony1-1.1.0 really ought to have remained open with a friendly
pointer to the RFP bug against Slony1-1.0.5. Instead, you've decided to close
my ITP bug and referred me to a bug report which doesn't really have much
to do with Slony1-1.1.0. On top of that, you've just treated someone who
was just trying to contribute to Debian like an idiot.
> I don't particularly care who ends up maintaining the package but it's
> more than a little annoying to have someone not read the documentation,
> prior bug reports, or apparently even look for prior bugs and then be
> bitched out by what I'm guessing was your boss on IRC for pointing out
> to you the existing bug report and why it hadn't been uploaded yet.
srbaker is not my boss. He's a Debian developer and old friend who has
offered to help me package Slony. If you don't understand his frustration,
then you really ought to re-read your comments on my ITP bug report.
Again, a friendly pointer to the existing RFP for Slony1-1.0.5 was all that
was necessary.
> As an additional tidbit- it'd probably be best to wait till the 8.0 debs
> are in Debian before putting the slony packages in to avoid what will
> probably be a great deal of ugliness in the transistion from one
> packaging methodology to another in the main Postgres packaging. The
> 8.0 debs are already in experimental, they're mainly waiting for sarge
> to be released before going into sid because of the libpq SONAME bump.
That sounds like good advice. Thanks for the heads-up.
Tim
>
> Thanks,
>
> Stephen
Reply to: