Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>>> Roland Stigge wrote:
>>>> Hi Gilles,
>>>> first - I'm sorry if you sometimes feel offended by my work on Xenomai 
>>>> in Debian. I understand that you are very much connected to your project 
>>>> and want to have it working perfectly everywhere.
>>>> Unfortunately, my time to work on this is limited and the last uploads 
>>>> were work in progress - to provide latest Xenomai in Debian. Further 
>>>> work on it was planned for this weekend.
>>>> But please also understand that Debian developers will possibly 
>>>> prioritize work on upstream packages where they feel their work is 
>>>> appreciated. So please think about your tone before sending email and 
>>>> driving people away from Xenomai.
>>> What matters for me is Xenomai users, not the Debian package maintainer.
>>> I am almost thinking that I would prefer Xenomai not having an
>>> "official" Debian package which has been shipping for monthes with buggy
>>> adeos patches and lagging behind upstream development.
>> Hey guys, this leads to nothing.
>> I agree with Gilles that a distro package that could appear to users
>> like it's as mature as upstream while it isn't does not help anyone. But
>> not all the work here is paid, and resources will remain limited. So
>> Roland's remark is valid as well that not everything can be done
>> instantly in The Perfect Way.
>> The only way to resolve this without killing the idea of ready-to-use
>> Xenomai package is to openly discuss the problems of both sides and try
>> to find optimal solutions. I also bet Roland would be happy about
>> patch-based discussions - just like we are for upstream. Just let the
>> discussion take place here on this list, in an objective manner, and
>> ideally before things may show up in releases etc.
> As I already said, I think the proper place to discuss all this is on
> the Xenomai mailing list. I have no problem renaming sigtest, at all, I
> do not even require a patch to do it. The point is that we did not even
> knew that it generated a conflict. And for me this is the real problem,
> I am all for helping Roland generating good packages, but if he does not
> want to talk to us, what choice do we have?

We can only ask him kindly to remember


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Xenomai-core mailing list

Reply via email to