On 1/11/06, Gustavo Noronha Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Em Qua, 2006-01-11 às 19:54 -0300, Daniel Ruoso escreveu: > > Em Qua, 2006-01-11 às 14:36 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG escreveu: > > > Gustavo Franco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > It was already discussed[0], and there's no consensus on this idea of > > > > "every Ubuntu changeset, a patch in Debian BTS" between DDs. > > > Right. I want Ubuntu to exercise judgment, and not just give a big > > > pile of patches, some of which are Debian-relevant and some of which > > > are not. Think, for example, of the normal way a Debian developer > > > should interact with upstream. > > > > This is exactly the point, what can I do with a patch if I don't know > > why it's there? Which problem is it trying to address (I know, I can > > read the patch and guess, but WTF), and why such solution was adopted... > > Everytime I submit a patch, I also submit this reasoning... > > That's sometimes documented in the changelog. I benefited quite a lot > from the ubuntu patches for gksu, and I've worked quite nicely with > seb128 and mvo on issues like this one and update-manager.
I agree, things like that are happenning all the time but many DDs just don't know and Canonical is failing to inform the community how and where they're helping. I think they're just saying that they're helping a lot. > (...) -- Gustavo Franco
