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. -- Gilles _______________________________________________ Xenomai-core mailing list Xenomai-core@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
