On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 07:49:09PM -0500, Sean Harshbarger wrote: > Until the "true" maintainer decides on his plan of action on gdm we are > stuck with the third party packages like mine. I have been activly > keeping it up to date for the past few months. Now it is already preped > for mainstream release as long as I have the go ahead to do it. If
And you build it for all supported arches ? > anything bugs are fixed in my version and will help the "real" release > be good. I would recommend that we just use mine in the > meantime...report problems to me, and ill fix them and release the > unoffical versions. If the package is to be orphaned then I elect that I > should adopt it since I have the experience and system already in place. I still don't understand why a gdm2 package is not acceptable. And i didn't see any reason in all this discution apart from "the ftp-master won't accept it". Ryan, what is your position on gdm2 package in unstable ? Friendly, Sven Luther
