> Le 8 juil. 2016 à 16:03, Felipe Sateler <fsate...@debian.org> a écrit : > > On 7 July 2016 at 19:12, Thibaut Varène <vare...@debian.org> wrote: >> >>> On 08 Jul 2016, at 01:01, Felipe Sateler <fsate...@debian.org> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Thibaut, >>> >>> On 7 July 2016 at 18:41, Thibaut Varène <vare...@debian.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 22:06, z...@debian.org wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Control: tags 796612 + patch >>>>> Control: tags 796612 + pending >>>>> >>>>> Dear maintainer, >>>>> >>>>> I've prepared an NMU for flashybrid (versioned as 0.18+nmu2) and >>>>> uploaded it to DELAYED/5. Please feel free to tell me if I >>>>> should delay it longer. >>>> >>>> It’s ok, you do what you have to do. >>>> If you want to take over maintainership, please be my guest. I’m >>>> maintaining “upstream” here now: >>>> >>>> http://hacks.slashdirt.org/sw/flashybrid/ >>>> >>>> I’d welcome a patch to merge btw. >>> >>> Your upstream page claims that 0.19 supports systemd. >> >> It “supports” it to the extent that it fixes #784890 and boots correctly on >> Jessie (as far as my very basic tests showed). It does not have the glue >> that the NMU supposedly fixes. Glue I’d be happy to merge were I sent a >> patch. > > Christian, you didn't attach the first nmu diff apparently, could you > please re send it? > >> >>> Why not upload >>> that version to debian? >> >> Because my upload rights have been revoked with the 1024-bit keys purge, and >> at this point I don’t care anymore. > > I'd be happy to sponsor the upload. But if you are no longer > maintaining the package in debian maybe it should be RMed instead.
I’m not interested in becoming a second-class DD after 12 years of service. If that package cannot muster the interest of an actual maintainer, then maybe it should indeed be removed from the archive. I will keep it alive on my website anyway. Best, T.
