Keep in mind I am just a user but I'm not one to skip a good technical
discussion.
I'm ignoring your other points on purpose, there is only so much I can
handle in one sitting.
On 20/12/23 13:24, Bálint Réczey wrote:
Having separate packages follows Debian packaging best practices and
served external projects extending wireshark such as netexpect (
https://tracker.debian.org/news/505793/accepted-netexpect-018-1-source-i386/
I lookup up what netexpect is. Your link is from 2011. Actual link
(https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/netexpect) says "This package is not
part of any Debian distribution." OK... Starting strong there.
) and the separately maintained libvirt dissector (
https://packages.debian.org/unstable/libvirt-wireshark ).
You keep coming back to the libvirt plugin. What do you expect to prove
with this? You really think maintaining separate Debian packages is a
benefit to a Wireshark plugin? I'm sorry, I don't know how to respond to
non-sensical statements. Do you want me to build the libvirt-wireshark
plugin against our RPM package just to put this argument to rest once
and for all?
As I interpret our Code of Conduct collaboration with other projects
is highly encouraged no matter if Wireshark builds on them or they
build on Wireshark. I acted according to that in maintaining the
Debian packaging both here and in the official Debian repository.
Straw man argument. No one said collaboration is bad.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
