The rsync discussion happened in private mail, so there’s no paper trail of that, sorry.
I did supply a patch, as described in the article, and the maintainer refused it. On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 10:07 PM Andreas Tille <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 Martin Michlmayr wrote: > > (I haven't looked at rsync and this is a general reply.) > > > > First, find out *why* it's non-standard. Mabye there are good > > technical reasons. If so, solutions can be found (e.g. improvements > > to debhelper). Maybe it's a case of "it works" and the developer > > doesn't want to spend the time to change? If so, you could provide a > > patch. Maybe there is unfamiliarity or doubts about debhelper? In > > thast case, some explanations or illustrations might help. etc > > Quoting the article[1]: > > Lastly, changes can easily be slowed down significantly by holdouts who > refuse to collaborate. My canonical example for this is rsync, whose > maintainer refused my patches to make the package use debhelper purely > out of personal preference. > > No idea whether Michael might reply but CCing him anyway for > clarification. I've checked src:rsync in BTS but did not found anything. > > > I think was thinking the Debian Developer's Reference would be the > > appropriate place. > > > > I also like the term "Debian Development Policy" fwiw. > > That's the point: For me a reference is a set of suggestions that might > be helpful or not. A policy is something we agreed upon and strive to > accomplish by using tools like lintian whether something is compliant or > not. We could also file bug reports if something is in conflict with > that policy. > > Kind regards > > Andreas. > > > [1] https://michael.stapelberg.ch/posts/2019-03-10-debian-winding-down/ > > -- > http://fam-tille.de > -- Best regards, Michael
