❦ 17 octobre 2016 15:36 +0100, Punit Agrawal <punitagra...@gmail.com> :

>>  - Going the long way by asking the technical committee to hand over the
>>    maintainance of the package to you (I'll sponsor your uploads if you
>>    aren't DD). I can do it if you want.
>>
>>  - Going the short way by putting your package as "global6" with a
>>    conflict/replace against the regular global. Such a package may be
>>    rejected by FTP-master (it should use alternatives) and we'll have to
>>    escalate to the technical committee for a decision. But it may also
>>    just work. I can sponsor your upload.
>>
>> I think Ron won't like the first solution at all but maybe he'll be fine
>> with the second one (he says previously that he would not prefer such a
>> solution but it seems that it was not too hostile).
>>
>> Which solution do you prefer?
>
> If we are going to end up going to the technical committee either
> ways, I'd rather that Ron gets a chance to change things instead of us
> working around him by uploading another package. Considering that
> users have been waiting for a long time, a bit more time isn't going
> to hurt.
>
> Having said that, I am not that familiar with debian processes so
> can't say which is the better option.

It's a matter of opening a bug against the pseudo-package tech-ctte:
 https://www.debian.org/devel/tech-ctte

I can do that for you. This is the proper solution as they can help in
moving forward. However, note that in the past, it is pretty rare for
the technical committee to overrule a maintainer. But each case is a
separate case, it may just work.
-- 
Make sure special cases are truly special.
            - The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to