Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukher...@gmail.com> wrote: > > iiuc, getmail6 is not a "hostile fork".
It is; I could explain it, but I already have. Quoting from the getmail documentation: Why do I say it's a "hostile" fork? Because I have communicated with the maintainer and indicated I would be thrilled to accept their changes bringing Python 3 compatibility, as long as they were in reviewable condition, so that I could be sure I wasn't introducing bugs into getmail when I merged their changes. [...] That maintainer has shown precisely zero interest in submitting his changes for me to merge into getmail; he literally ignores every question/request I have made on the subject. > getmail6 is a Python3 based fork which all the distros had to package > because you have declined to support Python3. Please do not put words into my mouth. I have never - not one single time - said anything to suggest I would, will, or do refuse to support Python 3. In fact, I have said exactly the opposite countless times. In case there is any doubt: there will be a Python 3 version of getmail. > Roland has offered to send you ( I think already sent you) patches. That would be another misunderstanding, then. He has never sent me any patch, much less anything reviewable. All I want is a simple, self-contained series of patches that change things in a way that is reviewable - you know, the standard way to submit patches, like the Linux kernel workflow and countless others. A single diff that just runs getmail through the 2to3 tool and then hacks on fixes until it runs will touch virtually every line in the code. That would be completely unreviewable, and nobody would expect that to be a workable way of submitting changes - but that's immaterial, as he hasn't even done that. > If I rename the package then I will need to add another transitional > package linking getmail6 with the new package which will not do > anything to help your problem. On the contrary -- it will help me *in future*. Please do rename the package and executable. > Renaming the executable is not possible as that will break lots of > user's scripts. Just have apt-listchanges tell people to change their scripts or crontabs from "getmail" to "wonderfulmailpuller" or whatever. I see these sorts of announcements regularly when I upgrade Debian packages, and particularly when updating a major version. You are removing getmail and installing a different package - you do this sort of thing all the time. It's a trivial fix, and I would argue it's *less* disruptive to users, because then at least people will be able to find the correct place to get support, rather than searching "getmail" and finding nothing related to their problem at all (because the bug isn't in getmail, and whereupon they then contact me). > And if the executables need to be renamed then that needs to be done from > upstream so that it is consistent in all other distros and pypi. Please > discuss that with Roland, the getmail6 upstream maintainer. As I have said, he obstinately refuses any name change, claiming equal rights to the name I have built up for 23 years. I'm really disappointed that Debian - or this package maintainer - doesn't give a damn about doing the right, ethical thing here. Charles -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Charles Cazabon <charlesc-getm...@pyropus.ca> Software, consulting, and services available at http://pyropus.ca/ ------------------------------------------------------------------
