On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 11:39:42AM +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote: > Michael Meskes wrote: > > I have no idea what Daniel really did on the package. > I did about 90% of the inital packaging.
Which just left the last 90% of the packaging, I guess. > Patrick uploaded removed me from changelog in the two last uploads > (virtualbox 1.4.0svn4130-dfsg-1 and virtualbox-ose 1.4.0svn4130-dfsg-1 > that is) without notifying me. In all previous uploads to NEW, I was in > the co-maintainer. FWIW, the uploads of virtualbox to NEW were: |virtualbox_1.4.0-1_amd64.changes: 20070618213209|process-unchecked|Moving to new 20070709174342|process-new|rejected |virtualbox_1.4.0svn3946-dfsg-1_i386.changes 20070801121715|process-unchecked|Moving to new 20070801222037|process-new|rejected |virtualbox_1.4.0svn3946-dfsg-2_i386.changes 20070801143204|process-unchecked|Moving to new 20070801222028|process-new|rejected |virtualbox_1.4.0svn3946-dfsg-1_i386.changes 20070802113206|process-unchecked|Moving to new 20070812215652|process-new|rejected |virtualbox_1.4.0svn4130-dfsg-1_amd64.changes 20070824113207|process-unchecked|Moving to new 20070827060822|process-new|rejected The .dsc from the first 3946-dfsg-1 above (1st August) listed: Maintainer: Patrick Winnertz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Uploaders: Philipp Hug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marvin Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If you weren't involved in the uploads to NEW over the past month to notice, it seems reasonably fair to say you weren't co-maintaining the package. If that's something that was just a one month thing, fine; but it's not the end of the world either way. |virtualbox_1.4.0svn4130-dfsg-1_amd64.changes 20070830124706|process-unchecked|Moving to new 20070901080307|process-new|Accepting changes |virtualbox_1.4.0svn4130-dfsg-1_i386.changes 20070901194714|process-unchecked|Accepting changes |virtualbox-ose_1.4.0svn4130-dfsg-1_amd64.changes 20070903134705|process-unchecked|Moving to new 20070903173435|process-new|Accepting changes |virtualbox-ose_1.4.0svn4130-dfsg-1_i386.changes 20070904094702|process-unchecked|Accepting changes |virtualbox-ose_1.5.0-dfsg-1_i386.changes 20070905054704|process-unchecked|Accepting changes |virtualbox-ose_1.5.0-dfsg-1_amd64.changes 20070905070206|process-unchecked|Accepting changes Then doing an upload that goes to a new upstream revision, adds code which doesn't have a license at all, let alone a DFSG-free one, without consulting the people you're claiming to be co-maintaining the package with doesn't sound very impressive either. > Upstream is generally cooperative and understands the problems, hence I > see this a bit more relaxed (for the next few days only, until it's > sorted out). However, if ftp-master do disagree, I'll can re-upload > 1.4.0, superseeding the 1.5.0 upload. Personally, I don't think you should be even considering uploading anything right now -- the above seems to me to have been some pretty bad judgement calls, and the contents of an Uploaders: field or the lack of a proper license for something upstream intends to be free software can all wait for a day or two. For a package that's been in unstable for under a week to require a renaming due to trademarks, have a hijack war and thread on -devel, and start getting new upstream versions with non-DFSG code strikes me as pretty unimpressive all round, really... Cheers, aj
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature