On Sat, Jul 01, 2017 at 08:17:02AM +0000, Antonio Radici wrote: > From your statement above I understand your point clearly, I think a solution > can be found and Debian tooling provides various alternatives, I will discuss > the various options with a couple of people more expert than me on Debian > packaging and I will come back to you, this can take up to 2 weeks in the > worst > case.
Have you had a chance to do this yet? > Iwould say let's proceed as follow: > > * I will investigate the possible options and I will come back to both you > and > Richard with one or more proposals for the future of the package in > Debian. > > * I know your views and I will try my best to make sure that they are > satisfied in the proposals. My understanding is that the original mutt > targz + extra feature would be OK for you as long as those features are > cleanly split in patches Yes, this would technically satisfy the problem, but... > * You let me know whether code formatting changes can be included (in one > way > or another), or whether there is a future for inclusion for those changes, > this will greatly reduce the diff between the packages. I haven't replied to this, because every time I thought about it, the answer was "no". So it seemed a better idea to wait and see how things went. It's been a few weeks, and my viewpoint hasn't changed. I don't see what I possibly have to gain by cooperating on this. All it would do is make it easier for you to try to combine Mutt with a fork and still call your package "mutt". I believe you ethically and legally already need to change your source tarball back to Mutt's if you want to name your package thus. Technically, separating out the NeoMutt patches would be satisfactory, but I would rather you make a decision which project you want to ship, or ship two packages, not ship a bastardization. You talk about "user expectations", but I've spent plenty of effort cleaning up and merging external patches, fixing bugs and security issues, and creating new features. I've seen nothing but even greater distance from Debian's package in return; culminating in you completely switching your source tarball out. Enough! So please submit your proposal, and I do expect something soon, but don't expect my cooperation unless you are willing to ship something _much_, _much_ closer to my upstream tarball. -- Kevin J. McCarthy GPG Fingerprint: 8975 A9B3 3AA3 7910 385C 5308 ADEF 7684 8031 6BDA
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
