On 26/06/07 at 16:02 +0300, Baruch Even wrote:
> * Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070626 15:26]:
> > On 26/06/07 at 14:01 +0300, Baruch Even wrote:
> > > * Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070626 13:56]:
> > > > On 26/06/07 at 00:29 +0300, Baruch Even wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > > 
> > > > > I believe I've answered your email but I just looked at the bts and I 
> > > > > see no record for it so here goes another reply for the record.
> > > > > 
> > > > > You asked if I wanted to adopt websec for which I am upstream 
> > > > > maintainer. I will probably do that if no one else does, but I'd be 
> > > > > happier if someone else does the Debian packaging as I have little 
> > > > > time 
> > > > > to work on websec and having someone else maintain the Debian 
> > > > > packaging 
> > > > > and forwarding just the upstream bugs would be better for me.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Let me know if you are still interested in maintaining websec, if not 
> > > > > I'll go for the default option and adopt it myself so it won't 
> > > > > package-rot too much.
> > > > 
> > > > Hi Baruch,
> > > > 
> > > > My perl knowledge is very limited, so I don't feel confortable
> > > > maintaining it alone. However, if you want to share the load for the
> > > > packaging bugs, we could maintain it together on collab-maint.
> > > 
> > > OK. Works for me. I'm not a perl guru myself but I can handle myself
> > > with enough manpage reading.
> > > 
> > > I'd be happy to try git for for package maintenance but have no problem
> > > working with svn (or possibly another choice). Do you have any
> > > preference?
> > 
> > Ah, I don't know git either, but trying it sounds good to me.
> 
> Ok. We can always change to something else if we fail to work with git
> or it doesn't suite us. I won't be able to do anything at work right now
> so I'll look at creating the repo in the evening, unless you beat me to
> it.
> 
> I believe that for a start we can have an upstream branch, a debian
> branch and an integration branch of the two which is used for merges
> from both of the branches. We should strive to have all patches to the
> code in either feature branches.

I'm not sure, I haven't watched the "maintaining packages with git" talk
yet. Have you?
-- 
| Lucas Nussbaum
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]             GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to