Anthony Towns wrote: > > - Some maintainers don't want to give up the maintainership of their > > packages. > > And if they're already doing a decent job, why should they want to? As > long as you're feeding the patches you need or want to them, and they're > actively addressing their bug reports this isn't an issue.
Nice, but as long as they're taking credit for they job they've done so far they should have no objections to handing over the package to someone who works full-time on GNOME. It's a simple matter of resources and commitment. I'd like you to consider the (weak) similarity to the egcs/gcc situation in the past which had been resolved as egcs being given official gcc maintainership by GNU. This project should avoid duplication of effort. As I said before, the volunteer time of GNOME Debian maintainers can be put to better use. I'm sure there are a lot of issues they could be interested in, and a lot of good coding to do. > Removing an unnecessary fork and killing off all the pain that it's > already causing is much more important than fixing every bug right now. Hmmm. This fork features much better software than the Debian version. With a little effort, helix people can fix the dependencies (by copying things from debian ones, etc as you say), and be the official gnome maintainers. They don't seem to be trying to introduce incompatibilites to ensure corporate future. I'm confident that they're just trying to deliver a good piece of free software. Thanks, -- ++++-+++-+++-++-++-++--+---+----+----- --- -- - - + Eray "exa" Ozkural . . . . . . + CS, Bilkent University, Ankara ^ . o . . | mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] . ^ . .
