On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 06:49:37AM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote: > On Tuesday 24 January 2006 00:08, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > Le lundi 23 janvier 2006, Paul Johnson a écrit : > > > On Sunday 22 January 2006 03:16, David Weinehall wrote: > > > > Since all Ubuntu packages are recompiled against a different set of > > > > libraries, the bug might not even affect the Debian package, even > > > > though they share the same source. Hence having Ubuntu developers > > > > triage the bugs to rule out such issues before they are forwarded to > > > > Debian's BTS is always a good thing; thus the maintainer field should > > > > be changed for *binary packages*. The source is the same, so the field > > > > should NOT be changed for *source packages*. > > > > > > Given Ubuntu hopelessly complicates everything, pretends there is > > > cooperation where there is none, and merely duplicates the effort of the > > > debian-desktop project, and contributes nothing to the community or > > > society, what's stopping us from officially discouraging Ubuntu's > > > existence? > > > > FWIW, what you say is false and *many* developers are interested in > > cooperation, not in war. > > > > And Ubuntu is doing far more for us than most other derivatives that we > > ever had. > > Provide evidence, please.
Which other derivative has made available all of the changes they've made, more-or-less as they make them? - Matt
