[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on debian-devel, in http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200311/msg01218.html:
This nasty behavior shows that being an officiel Debian developer does not mean quality.
He's referring to Filip Van Raemdock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> uploading some packages without an ITP or contacting upstream, and (in Duck's opinion) not doing a very good packaging job. In fact, many of Filip's packages do not show evidence of good maintenance: clanlib: current version (in testing and unstable) is NMU, has RC bug gpdf: current version (in testing and unstable) is NMU, has 17 bugs xmon: current version (in testing and unstable) is NMU nurbs++: not built on hppa 4 months, no evidence of work on that; libtool rebuild bug 121 days innovation3d: not built on arm 4 months, no evidence of work on that; segfault bug 96 days innovation3d-plugins: FTBFS bug for 2 years eazel-engine: stuff in /usr/doc bug, 209 days libglpng: 2 bugs because it depends on old libpng2-dev xracer: error messages on startup (though it still works) In contrast, the following of his packages seem (on a cursory inspection) to be in good shape: freeciv gnome-apt gtkcookie gxset hermes1 (except that I think it should probably be libhermes1) ooqstart shared-mime-info (only in experimental) wmcube Some of them have been uploaded quite recently and show quick response to bugs. Perhaps Filip should consider maintaining fewer packages, only the ones he actually still has time for and interest in? Frankly, the same is perfectly likely to be true of plenty of other Debian developers; I just happened to notice Filip's name come up twice in quick succession. Is there any recognized way to suggest to developers that they need help with some of their packages? :-) I don't see one, beyond emailing them (and coming across as rude and arrogant) or emailing mailing lists (which is probably even worse, although I just did it).
