On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 04:08:39PM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > pe, 2008-05-30 kello 22:01 +0900, Charles Plessy kirjoitti: > > Le Fri, May 30, 2008 at 02:50:28PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> > > Please come back in 2008! ;-) > > > You speak as an "elder" that doesn't want to move forward > > > But no, you prefer to not explain your problem... > > > Please stop this pissing contest... > > I have read better emails from you, Raphaël. > > The difference between "using the BTS" and "asking the maintainer" is > > that dropping a patch in the BTS is not asking the maintainer if the NMU > > is welcome. > Patch to the BTS plus a DELAYED/n upload (with a sufficiently large n) > is, to me, a way of asking the maintainer. It is, perhaps, less smoothly > diplomatic than e-mailing privately, but I don't really see that it is > rude. Patch to the BTS is not a statement that the maintainer has a deadline to reply before the patcher screws up the package in the archive with a wrong patch. Sending a patch to the BTS is not sufficient - the mail to the BTS must also clearly state the intent to NMU, so the maintainer knows the mail must be handled with a high priority. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
