Ean Schuessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The only reason that my mail went to -devel was your request to remove > Kaffe from seven architectures without consulting me. You made that > request to -devel and that request required this response. If you > feel foolish then lay the blame closer to the source.
I did not make the request on -devel! I did send a bug to ftp.debian.org and X-Debbugs-CC to -devel! If you don't want kaffe to be removed for these arches, you'd better close #235808! To do that, I already asked on -release and try to find a solution. > The last significant change to Kaffe from a *packaging* perspective > was migrating it to DBS and that was my work. Your recent NMUs (which > have been insanely numerous) disabled DBS by simply renaming the > patches directory to "no-patches". That isn't adding value and was > done without a byte of email consulting me. I'd prefer cdbs. I already explain the "no-patches" thing. Did you understand I sent a lot of mails to know if the problem were resolved? Some patches are already applied upstream (thanks for your help Dalibor). Do you know how long it took to do that? > Without sarcasm I will tell you again that I appreciate your > enthusiasm and want to work with you. Simply be aware that I will not > be ignored and will not tolerate haphazard changes that are not > cleared with me first. There is nothing unreasonable about that > attitude and nothing that is out of line with policy. I can't believe your attitude. If I did not read -java for the past year, maybe I'd agree with you and ask for deleting my account from Debian for ever but hey! wake up! I can't count the mails I send to you you never replied! You can look at the bugs in the bts you never respond, find a solution or never upload something. > For the time being I will leave you as an Uploader on the condition > that you communicate your intended changes with me first and only > upload when I am grossly unresponsive (ie. more than a week). My > preference is to receive changes in the form of a DBS patch. No way! My idea about co-maintaining a package is not submitting 3 copy of a paper to some manager and wait he kindly agrees. Co-maintaining will be with an infrastructure and with people who answer mails within two days. People who does respect the package and the packages that depends on it! Do you know how kaffe is important if we want more java packages in main?! > I think that the rest of this can be handled on -java. I invite -devel > to return to its regularly scheduled flame war. It should never go to -devel! But thanks for the publicity. > E > > ps. Developers with platform specific experience who would like to see > Kaffe remain on sparc, os390, alpha and so forth should please try to > get Kaffe to build from source. Even if the JIT won't compile on your > platform there may be hope for the interpreter. Drop me a line if you > have interest or success stories. Many thanks for your help! -- .''`. : :' :rnaud `. `' `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
