On 07/08/2015 03:57 PM, Loic Dachary wrote: >>> The other reason is that >>> jerasure can be optimized for SIMD instructions (ARM / INTEL) and not >>> doing so significantly impacts performances. >> >> Once again, this seems to be an improvement suggestion for libjerasure >> rather >> than argument against using system library. > > I'm not saying it's impossible. Jerasure has been packaged for > quite some time now and no effort has been made to address these > issues. Hence my proposal to work on the packages if they were > orphaned. Although I could teach Thomas or someone else how and > why this should be done, I don't have that kind of time right > now. Working on the package is less time consuming.
Loic, I really don't see why I should orphan a package just because you believe it doesn't have the correct optimization. If you look at the Debian bug tracker, you will see that I am very reactive to any issue, and that I do apply patches which are sent against the packages I maintain. So far, I haven't seen any patch from you sent against these libraries. At the same time as you're asking for orphaning a package which is well maintained, you are saying "I don't have that kind of time right now". Please have a more positive and constructive attitude. Get a patch done, send it upstream to fix the issue, and then we can go from there. Unless this is done, I think it's really a bad attitude to ask for the package to be orphaned, or to ask to take it over. Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
