On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 3:19 PM, Roland Stigge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>> What I criticize is patching without submitting patches upstream, or
>> without consulting upstream package maintainers, or making debian
>> patches hard to apply upstream.
> I both submitted to Xenomai upstream and provided an easy patch (not
> even assuming the stripped debian/*), you should be fully satisfied
> now... ;-)
> For the libssl case, it was basically the same, as I understand it. (I'm
> not involved into Debian's openssl packaging, though.)
>> For instance I saw  there was a bug with generating debian packages
>> for ARM. Instead of reporting this bug upstream, which, as the
>> maintainer of Xenomai ARM port, I could have helped to resolve, you
>> chose to resolve the bug silently [...]
> I just incorporated the patch by Riku Voipio for Debian #477720 which
> resolved the problem for Debian's ARM porters. (Further, I sent you the
> patch in a convenient way...)
> If you have further improvements in 2.4.4, fine. :-)

Ok. I have no excuse, it was even in the changelog if I did not want
to read the whole patch. But technically you did not announce the
2.4.3-7 patch on Xenomai mailing list :-)

> PS: I hope it doesn't look to the others like we are complaining about
> each other's work. So for the rest of xenomai-core developers: This is
> just mine and Gilles' way to say "thanks for your work" to each other. ;-)))

Yes, I should stress that I consider it as a great advance for the
Xenomai project to have a Debian package, and thank you for the
packaging hard work.


Xenomai-core mailing list

Reply via email to