Le Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 09:08:04PM +0100, Guillem Jover a écrit : > > Sorry, I should have added here my usual note about being open to > reconsideration *if* convincing arguments are put forward. But I > was pretty much unimpressed with the way this had been brought up. > Way more so now with the threats of TC force, but I guess that's > the new Debian-way…
Hi Guillem, I would like you to consider that, what you would feel if the TC would push a decision on you, we feel it when you push your decision on us. Clearly, when my work was first interrupted by dpkg-dev after upgrading it, and when I realised through the changelog and the bug log that it was an unconcerted top-down decision, my feeling was that the contribution that I was making was not as welcome as I thought, and that I should find a better way to spend my time. > For example, what does ikiwiki (a native package with a native > version) has to do with anything? The Ikiwiki package, which uses a native version number for a clearly non-native work in the sense of Policy's section 3.2.1 ("packages which have been written especially for Debian"), shows how inconsistent is the concept of a "native" package. It shows that there is no problem with the version number indicating one thing and the source format indicating another one. So please revert your change, which solves no practical problems. Cheers, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org