On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 15:13:21 -0500, Celejar wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 20:53:27 +0200 Andrei Popescu wrote:
>
>> On Lu, 15 nov 10, 09:21:54, Celejar wrote:
>> >
>> > Perhaps I took it the wrong way, but I thought that the maintainer
>> > could have been a bit more cooperative and sympathetic, given that
>> > we're dealing with a repo which is widely used and practically
>> > official, even though it technically isn't.
>>
>> While I tend to agree with you, it seems to me DDs are not very
>> enthusiastic about work done outside the Debian Project. In most cases
>> their skepticism is justified (it's not just a case of NIH[1]).
>
> But that's exactly the point! Camaleón asked why someone wouldn't use
> dmo, and I responded by pointing out that there will be inevitable
> conflicts between packages from dmo and the official repos, and I noted
> that DDs may just brush you off if you report such problems.
The same you describe here is what happens in other distributions... in
fact, external repositories ("community driven" ones) are always
problematic to deal with in a way that some of these repos provide
packages which conflicts with the stock ones (same package, different
versions, usually with no restrictions -like codecs, etc...) and more
often than we would like problems arise... and you can't go to the bug
tracking system and complain there, devels will just tell you:
a) To contact the package owner to fix the bug
b) To install stock version of the package
Sad (from user's side), but understable (from a DD perspective).
But I didn't know "debian-multimedia" also suffers from this... I mean,
most of the packages are available under standard repos and just the ones
with "terse" licences need to be downloaded from external sources.
Greetings,
--
Camaleón
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2010.11.16.23.12...@gmail.com
