On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 13:19:08 +0200 Michael Hanselmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2007 at 03:07:28AM +0200, Benedikt Boehm wrote: > > As it seems, you do not have the time and/or interest to cleanup the > > qmail mess, but don't want anyone to touch (net)qmail ebuilds > > either, i have put the updated ebuilds for qmail and friends into > > my overlay. [1] > > You interpret something into it which isn't true. I'm not “holding” > it. Publishing such unverified interpretations publically isn't > exactly nice, too. It's just that I don't have time today or tomorrow > to look more exactly into it, or, more exactly, I have things with > higher priorities to be done first (but also Free Software related!). > And as the current maintainer I just said “no” to your code (for > now). There's nothing wrong with doing that if I'm not accepting it > (due to whatever reason). You didn't ask to take over maintainership. In fact you haven't been that nice either, but honestly i don't care. Therefore i have just moved the ebuilds to my overlay until you can review them ... > Doing a change like this to an ebuild has to be well thought, reviewed > and can't be done withing hours. netqmail is rather fragile to > breakage and we don't want our users to loose e-mails due to our > failures, do we? ... so that it can be tested by those who feel like. > Now, you should correct that blog entry (I'm not going into why moving > topics from MLs to blogs is very bad) to actually state true facts and > then wait a few days. I'll have some time during this week. > > Greets, > Michael > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
