Re: Bug#849754: RFS: guerillabackup/0.0.0-1
Hello Mentors,
Even when Debian inclusion does not make any progress, I would
be interested in improving the package. In the light of GDPR I
find it quite useful and therefore would still want to provide
and maintain it apart from being included in Debian.
So I would be grateful for any informal comments, what makes
the package look ugly. As the reasons making it uninteresting
for sponsors (people, who care about good looking software, I
assume) would be the same as for those people I want to provide
it for. Knowing them should help to improve quality greatly.
Any comments are welcome and will not be cited by me in public,
no matter how they are.
Best regards,
hd
halfdog writes:
> Hello Mentors,
>
> While the package in question (see [0]) is working 24/7 on multiple
> machines without problems, having created and transfered about
> 10k of data elements so far, also surviving updates, reboots,
> both the inclusion process but also the purging of obsolete RFS
> seems stuck.
>
> Should another round for inclusion be attempted or should the
> 2 bugs and mentors-site entry be closed/removed?
>
> Kind regards,
> hd
>
> PS: Current state: you might find [1] useful, especially message
> #16 (Sun, 1 Jan 2017) with a good (and demanding) review from
> Andreas Henriksson and the list of changes in response in message
> #23 (Thu, 04 May 2017).
>
> [0] https://mentors.debian.net/package/guerillabackup
> [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=849754
>
Reply to: