On Saturday 14 August 2010 17:00:38 Markos Chandras wrote: [...] > > > > - There is absolutely no reference to any patch sent upstream and I > > > > have not seen anything on the upstream dev ml. > > > > > > Thats because I didn't. I've fixed more than 40 bug wrt LDFLAGS. Do you > > > expect me to subscribe to 40 different ML and send them upstream? > > > > you don't need to subscribe, there's usually an AUTHORS file with emails > > you can use... > > As I said, I thought that maintainers was responsible to do it since they > follow all the bug progress after all. So according to you I should do all > the work. Tempting
yes please; I consider not doing it a bit rude as the maintainers will _have_ to clean after you. > > > The > > > patch is there, the maintainer is CC on the bug. All he has to do it to > > > send this damn patch to upstream. > > > > I can use the same reasoning and ask: > > Why don't you do it in the first place if that's "all" ? > > Cause I cannot maintain all the tree myself you're confused; contributing to an(other) OSS project (and retaining authorship of your patches & improvements) does not have much to do with maintaining a package. [...] > > > I only do QA fixing. If you have problem touching your > > > packages just say it > > > > I don't have problems with anyone touching "my" packages (esp. when > > they're herds packages...); though when I'm not happy with the technical > > details I let it be known and _really_ appreciate when the comments are > > taken into account instead of aggressively discarded by trying to argue > > why it's not been perfect in the first place ;) > > > > A. > > I don't think what I do is perfect. But all this kind of judgement is > quite demotivated I must say. Don't be demotivated. The only "judgement" I made is on the technical side and not on the global goal; on that side you can just fix it, get thanks & kudos and be done :) A.
