| 1 |
On Saturday 14 August 2010 17:00:38 Markos Chandras wrote: |
| 2 |
[...] |
| 3 |
> > > > - There is absolutely no reference to any patch sent upstream and I |
| 4 |
> > > > have not seen anything on the upstream dev ml. |
| 5 |
> > > |
| 6 |
> > > Thats because I didn't. I've fixed more than 40 bug wrt LDFLAGS. Do you |
| 7 |
> > > expect me to subscribe to 40 different ML and send them upstream? |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > you don't need to subscribe, there's usually an AUTHORS file with emails |
| 10 |
> > you can use... |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> As I said, I thought that maintainers was responsible to do it since they |
| 13 |
> follow all the bug progress after all. So according to you I should do all |
| 14 |
> the work. Tempting |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
yes please; I consider not doing it a bit rude as the maintainers will _have_ |
| 17 |
to clean after you. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> > > The |
| 20 |
> > > patch is there, the maintainer is CC on the bug. All he has to do it to |
| 21 |
> > > send this damn patch to upstream. |
| 22 |
> > |
| 23 |
> > I can use the same reasoning and ask: |
| 24 |
> > Why don't you do it in the first place if that's "all" ? |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> Cause I cannot maintain all the tree myself |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
you're confused; contributing to an(other) OSS project (and retaining |
| 29 |
authorship of your patches & improvements) does not have much to do with |
| 30 |
maintaining a package. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
[...] |
| 33 |
> > > I only do QA fixing. If you have problem touching your |
| 34 |
> > > packages just say it |
| 35 |
> > |
| 36 |
> > I don't have problems with anyone touching "my" packages (esp. when |
| 37 |
> > they're herds packages...); though when I'm not happy with the technical |
| 38 |
> > details I let it be known and _really_ appreciate when the comments are |
| 39 |
> > taken into account instead of aggressively discarded by trying to argue |
| 40 |
> > why it's not been perfect in the first place ;) |
| 41 |
> > |
| 42 |
> > A. |
| 43 |
> |
| 44 |
> I don't think what I do is perfect. But all this kind of judgement is |
| 45 |
> quite demotivated I must say. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
Don't be demotivated. The only "judgement" I made is on the technical side and |
| 48 |
not on the global goal; on that side you can just fix it, get thanks & kudos |
| 49 |
and be done :) |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
A. |
Archives