Re: packages.debian.org updated
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 10:22:44PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On a more general note, I understand the lack of interest to preserve access
> for me when I don't contribute to stuff. I didn't make myself useful, so I
> got cut off. That's fine. However, I have little understanding for when my
> access is a priori revoked on certain niche things where I'm almost the only
> person who cares about them, and mirrors are one such thing. It's utterly
> unreasonable to bar me from accessing those things simply because of the
Technically existing access was never revoked. You simply never had access
to the new infrastructure ;)
But the get serious again: Honestly my motivation to work on
reenabling access for debwww and webwml would probably have greatly
improved with, like, patches sent to me...
> Initially, when I humbly asked for access to p.d.o stuff in general to be
> restored on 2007-05-30, I got rather rudely rejected by Martin Schulze, and
> this was not remedied - rather, my request for explanation was completely
For the record: I have no objections allowing debwww access to puccini
(and I have no idea why Joey reacted the way he did).
I'm a bit wary on allowing sudo access to pkg_user without a single
proof that the members have looked at the new code and understand how to
work on it.
Frank Lichtenheld <email@example.com>