Svante Signell, le Wed 21 May 2014 10:20:16 +0200, a écrit : > On Wed, 2014-05-21 at 10:03 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > Svante Signell, le Wed 21 May 2014 09:49:59 +0200, a écrit : > > > Thomas and Samuel: It looks like upstream don't accept patches unless a > > > Hurd port maintainer commits to it. What's the use of all this job? > > > > Well, simply to keep the changes working. That is not surprising at all. > > I might not be interested any longer with this kind of requirements.
Well, then somebody else will have to if we want to keep the gnat port alive. I for myself don't really have time to do it. > What kind of person do you have to be to be accepted, a GNU/Hurd > developer or a GNU/Ada developer having a gnu.org account? Nothing special, just like for contributing to any opensource project; just someone who checks from times to times (in particular before releases) that the port works fine, and submit patches if needed. > > > (Of course it can at least run on Debian systems if/when accepted.) > > > > Sure, but will it continue working on the long term? That's the concern > > of upstream. > > I think the majority of work has bee done, Now that patch will change > slightly for every missing feature added to Hurd. Then it's all good, it's a matter of what I said above. > > In principle it's just a matter of fixing just a few things over the > > coming versions. But someone has to do it, otherwise the port will just > > die. > > I wonder ho the kfreebsd people managed to get accepted upstream? Simply by having someone making sure things are going right, I guess. Samuel