At the risk of being a bad person[1]: Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 06:43:29AM -0400, Thomas Dickey wrote:
>> This was fixed in upstream mawk 1.3.4 20100625. > > This is a bug about packaging. Your packaging in the package/ subdirectory > is not relevant to the status of this bug. Steve: you are right. But please try to realize what impression you are creating. When a person does something wrong, you are quick to tell them (good). When a person wants to do something to help you[2], you are silent despite requests to respond[3]. Thomas: it is nice to provide a local version of packaging as a convenience to users (see Linux’s “make deb-pkg” for a very nice example of this) but it is not productive to say the corresponding Debian packaging bugs are fixed upstream. It is like package highjacking at a distance. Just to let you know. Cheers, Jonathan [1] http://xana.scru.org/xana2/ - Apparently attempting to mediate between members of the human species is a thing not to do. Oh well. [2] like, say, put patches in an order that is easy to review [3] I at least still want to know: * timeframe: should I be rushing to get something only marginally better than what is in the current upstream branch, or is it worth spending time to - improve rcs-fast-import, recovering the full history - isolate whitespace changes, decreasing noise e.g. if nothing is likely to happen during debconf (as I would guess, but I do not know!) it would be nice to say so. * what else would help: ideally there would be a “blessed” public upstream vcs tree, but it seems that Thomas uses rcs which is not meant to be used that way. So what approximation to that will work for you? There could be “blessed” tarballs and small per-change patches, like vim has had for a while, for example. There could be a “blessed” tree with Thomas’s changes kept up-to-date by someone else. Or something else entirely. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
