Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [...] > Anyway, there are *still* packages which fail to list the licenses for > some of their files (beyond even /usr/share/doc/*/copyright) in > /usr/share/doc/*/copyright. > Emacs21 is the classic example; but since its maintainers clearly don't > give a damn about the Social Contract *or* Policy, I guess it's a poor > example.
If you have not perfected telepathy, you can't tell for sure what its maintainers do or don't give a damn about, so please don't make such wild claims. I'm not 100% sure, but a message about bug disputes to -devel on Mon, 4 Apr 2005 01:09:56 -0700 from Don Armstrong said: If you're sure that the bug should actually be upgraded, then discuss it on -devel, and get rough consensus, which should then convince the maintainer. If not, proceed to the ctte or similar as a last resort. I guess getting consensus from -devel about FDL won't happen any time soon, and the bug looks the right severity anyway, but maybe -release would lend a hand about maintainers denying an RC bug. Keep raising it higher until it is fixed well (maybe send a patch), or you don't think it's worth chasing any more (but I believe you are tenacious), or you are told definitively that your head is on backwards (and I believe you are humble enough to admit mistakes). -project is for "non-technical topics". Raising an emacs21 bug here will probably not help fix it. If you want to use it as an example, just mention http://bugs.debian.org/207932 and let people draw their own conclusions about its maintainer and the other "let all unmodifiables into main" campaigners there. Hopefully, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
