| 1 |
On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 12:45:56 +0800 |
| 2 |
Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 11/20/12 21:57, Alexis Ballier wrote: |
| 5 |
> > On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 09:10:51 +0000 (UTC) |
| 6 |
> > "Patrick Lauer (patrick)" <patrick@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> >> patrick 12/11/16 09:10:51 |
| 9 |
> >> |
| 10 |
> >> Modified: ChangeLog |
| 11 |
> >> Added: lyx-2.0.5.ebuild |
| 12 |
> >> Log: |
| 13 |
> >> Bump |
| 14 |
> >> |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > |
| 18 |
> > While the bump was fine, please read the damn metadata.xml when you |
| 19 |
> > touch a package you're not used to. Pavel has been doing a very good |
| 20 |
> > job in (proxy) maintaining lyx since years and you do not seem to |
| 21 |
> > have contacted him before doing the bump, which is a bit |
| 22 |
> > disrespectful for him IMHO. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> I disagree. A fix is a fix, a bump is a bump, no ego involved. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
And respect is respect. It's not because you woke up someday in a |
| 27 |
special mood that a 4+ years perfectly working workflow will change... |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> > If you want to help in having things done quicker because I'm not |
| 31 |
> > always responsive enough, then please do it correctly and ask Pavel |
| 32 |
> > to CC you when he sends me instructions for lyx. |
| 33 |
> I dislike this territorialism. Why add a single point of failure to |
| 34 |
> package maintenance? (What if you or Pavel "disappear" for any |
| 35 |
> reason?) |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Ask those who invented maintainers. Take your point to the council. So |
| 38 |
far these are the rules, follow them or leave it. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
As for the single point of failure, Pavel being part of upstream sends |
| 41 |
me the ebuilds _before_ the actual release. That is not what I call a |
| 42 |
failure. The proposal to also be a proxy still stands, but if you |
| 43 |
continue with this provocative behavior I'm not sure I want to work |
| 44 |
with you... |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
A. |
Archives