Re: We have a problem
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 08:28:53PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>
> On 05/06/2015 08:28 PM, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
>
> You know, this is normally _not_ the case.
>
> I don't understand why this basic concept is so hard to grasp for you.
> If you are not actively maintaining a package, you shouldn't be in the
> list of maintainers/uploaders.
>
> This isn't about discriminating against individuals but just to make
> sure the package has actually active and responsive maintainers,
> nothing more.
>
> This whole thing feels like you are rather interested in proliferating
> yourself because your name needs to be listed in every package which
> is related to debian-hams. Really, if you only cared about Debian and
> the packages, you wouldn't make such a fuss about not being in the
> list of active maintainers of a package which you aren't actively
> maintaining.
>
Actually, I don't care who is in the uploaders list. The thing I am
concerned with is Iain's lack of notifying even the people he *knows* are
responsive he is changing their role with respect to a package.
The issue has nothing to do with the uploaders list (except that is the latest
change made), and everything to do with cooperating with a group maintained
package environment. A simple email to the list stating "hey, I'm about to
upload a new version of package x. I've added/removed the following people.
If you want to be added or removed please let me know" - that's all it would
have taken - a courtesy to people who may be interested in such changes before
they are made. The same as "I'm working on a new version of package <>, does
anyone else have changes" is useful to send before you start updating a package
to keep everyone up to date.
Pat
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)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=vvUr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: