On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 08:03:02AM +0100, Philipp Kern wrote:
> I'd prefer if such a tool could replace an existing one. Why not aim at
> replacing dput if there's a reason for it?
I must concur. I can't see the reason for dput, dupload and dput-ng to
co-exist. If dput-ng has the momentum and is a superset of the features of the
previous two we should remove the previous two. I use the royal 'we', too often
we hide behind our package-centric view of the world ("package A is not
actively maintained. Package B reimplements it. Removing Package A is inactive
maintainer C's problem."). But having a plethora of
similar-but-slightly-different tools to do the same job increase the surface
area of stuff for beginners to navigate through and makes it that much harder
for contributors to get a handle on things.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121029151928.GB27366@debian
