Jonas, you must have missed one piece of my first email, which I report below:
> Jonas, I apologize for the duplicated work. Since you've been working on this
> for a long time I am more than willing to step down from {u,re}svg once the
> sources are rejected. I am no user of resvg and I am not interested in
> maintaining it other than to provide the rust library.
("once the sources are rejected" to me reads as "when the sources are
rejected", not "if", because I'd still expect rejection for the reasons I
explained). So I agree with you, and I said it from the first time: I am more
than willing to back off. No reason to do otherwise.
Then I wrote:
> if someone from the Rust Team (in cc) wanted to maintain resvg we could
> also remove src:resvg from unstable and go forward with my (sponsored)
> uploads. I am ok with both solutions, but I would like Jonas to have the final
> word on this given his longstanding interest in resvg.
Meaning if no one from the Team is interested, provided that you still are, I'd
rather not go forward with the uploads. If rejection is not automatic and I'll
have to get in touch with the FTPMasters, then I will. The reason why I pinged
you in private about this thread earlier today is precisely because the
FTPMasters are going forward with my NEW uploads and I need an answer as soon
as possible so I know what to do.
But then you answered
> I have no special interest in maintaining these packages
from which I gathered... you're not interested? So if you're not interested,
I'm not interested, no one from the Team showed up to signal interest, the
package was removed from testing... then why should I want to re-upload the
binaries? No issue with the long-term maintenance of the libraries, which I do
need as a dependency, but the binaries?
This being said, if you are going to maintain resvg+usvg in whatever form you
like, then thank you as it will mean less work for me. Please confirm you're
going to do so, this way I know how to deal with the packages in NEW.
