On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 18:17:25 -0500, Mike Mestnik <che...@mikemestnik.net> wrote: > Too much drama. Some users are familiar with Atheme's stance on > packaging, so you'll be asked to not package Atheme by just about > anybody. After so much time has passed it would be important to > re-affirm permission and also determine who has the right to suggest to > Debian that they would prefer there to not be a package and who has the > right to grant permission. > > It would be important for any mentor to understand the landscape. We > may have to disclaim that there is no support whatsoever from upstream > of this package or at least inform users that a "handful of Atheme > users" will angrily reject any requests pertaining to the Debian package. > > As far as Atheme's stance on this issue I have no idea, I can't even say > with any certainty who Atheme is aside from the copyright Upstream > Authors. Could any one of there objections prevent inclusion into Debian? > > It also should be noted that I have a mental illness, as I'm sure many > can relate, in working with ppl. I really only understand the actions > of computers and this causes humans to hate me, in my opinion unjustifiably.
I appreciate you being straightforward about this.
I have communicated with upstream and I think I have cleared those
issues. I have talked specifically with William Pitcock which gave us a
go on IRC and they have formally changed their website to reflect that,
as I mentionned in this bug report earlier.
If you are unconfortable to deal with upstream, please let me deal with
them. I can operate humans maybe a little bit better, and I will not
hate you for having trouble operating me. ;) I also have a good relation
with upstream so far.
In other words, I can mentor this package, given time.
A.
--
feature, n: a documented bug | bug, n: an undocumented feature
- Mario S F Ferreira <li...@freebsd.org>
pgpXWjylT1pSi.pgp
Description: PGP signature
