Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Sorry for the out-of-thread, off-list reply, but I'm arriving late to the discussion. I'm definitely interested in moving forward with a mechanism that makes it easier for DDs to communicate with Launchpad, but I want to add a comment on the topic. The main reason we don't activate accounts on peo

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * Ben Finney: > > >> I guess it's more of a Google QA issue > > > > No, if the pages exist and other pages tend to treat them as > > interesting (i.e. interesting pages link to those pages), Google > > is working as advertised if it indexes and reports

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

James Westby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On unactivated account pages launchpad now sets > > > > so these pages should not show up in results from well behaved > search engines. Ah, excellent, thank you. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) --

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

* Ben Finney: >> I guess it's more of a Google QA issue > > No, if the pages exist and other pages tend to treat them as > interesting (i.e. interesting pages link to those pages), Google is > working as advertised if it indexes and reports them. Sorry, but this is just wrong. If the page is not

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Mon, 2008-07-28 at 23:18 +1000, Ben Finney wrote: > No, if the pages exist and other pages tend to treat them as > interesting (i.e. interesting pages link to those pages), Google is > working as advertised if it indexes and reports them. On unactivated account pages launchpad now sets so

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * Russ Allbery: > > > Unfortunately, this then generates a whole pile of web pages > > supposedly for "you" that then show up in Google searches and the > > like despite having no information on them. I think that's one of > > the things that's turned

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

* Russ Allbery: > Unfortunately, this then generates a whole pile of web pages supposedly > for "you" that then show up in Google searches and the like despite having > no information on them. I think that's one of the things that's turned > DDs off on Launchpad; I know that it gave me a bad init

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 15:01:46 -0700 Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 05:53:28PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > >> >That requires LP to know who is or isn't a DD. Currently it has no such >> >knowledge, and I think it would require a fair amount of discussion to >>

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 05:53:28PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > >That requires LP to know who is or isn't a DD. Currently it has no such > >knowledge, and I think it would require a fair amount of discussion to > >decide how best to get such information, with a none-too-elegant outcome > >(spe

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 14:33:17 -0700 Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 03:58:57PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote: >> On Sun, 2008-07-27 at 15:36 +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote: >> > Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> > > #include >> > > * Reinhard Tartler [Wed,

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 03:58:57PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > On Sun, 2008-07-27 at 15:36 +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > > Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > #include > > > * Reinhard Tartler [Wed, Jul 23 2008, 04:36:39PM]: > > >> > How about activating it the first time they se

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 15:58:57 +0100 Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Why force activation in the first place? All the information needed to >"activate" a DD account already exists - our GnuPG fingerprints, our DD >email addresses and full names. If an email is received that is signed >by

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Sun, 2008-07-27 at 15:36 +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > #include > > * Reinhard Tartler [Wed, Jul 23 2008, 04:36:39PM]: > > > >> > How about activating it the first time they send a gpg-signed mail to > >> > the mail interface? How about simply

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Hi, On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 12:30:21PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Osamu Aoki wrote: > > I think we should encourage packager to contact upstream with simple > > "hello!" message and he (or myself) should be part of active upstream ML. > > When I had upstreams, I always used to do this. > > Often

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > #include > * Reinhard Tartler [Wed, Jul 23 2008, 04:36:39PM]: > >> > How about activating it the first time they send a gpg-signed mail to >> > the mail interface? >> >> My point is that I don't have the impression that Debian Developers want > > Fine.

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

#include * Reinhard Tartler [Wed, Jul 23 2008, 04:36:39PM]: > > How about activating it the first time they send a gpg-signed mail to > > the mail interface? > > My point is that I don't have the impression that Debian Developers want Fine. And mine tends to differ. > to have an LP account act

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

]] Andrei Popescu | IMHO (IANADD) this is too much black-white. What if a DD would be | interested in Ubuntu bugs, but doesn't have enough time to read the | docs? As seen in this thread some are not even aware that Launchpad | can be used via mail. Then they probably don't have time to process

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 12:15:20PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > > I've seen websites get openid wrong in a variety of amusing ways, > > but on reasonable implementations, you generally indicate your > > openid provider by trying your openid into the openid

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Reinhard Tartler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This would effectivly mean activating the respective LP account [1] and > associating the respective gpg key with that account. This would be of > course doable, but given from this and previous discussions, I do not > have the impression that this is

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 12:15:20PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Steve Langasek wrote: > > And even if LP accepted other openid providers, one would still have to log > > in to LP the first time in order to configure which openid provider to use, > > which I guess is still going to be more effort than

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Steve Langasek wrote: > And even if LP accepted other openid providers, one would still have to log > in to LP the first time in order to configure which openid provider to use, > which I guess is still going to be more effort than some are interested in > doing. :) I've seen websites get openid w

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Wed,23.Jul.08, 16:36:39, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > My point is that I don't have the impression that Debian Developers want > to have an LP account activated at all, so IMO it doesn't really matter > if the account is activated implicitly via some (authenticated) action > or exlicitly by click

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Matthew Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed Jul 23 16:13, Reinhard Tartler wrote: >> Matthew Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> > Given that Ubuntu takes things directly from Debian, and hence all >> > Debian Developers have a vested interest in Ubuntu packages, would it >> > make

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Wed Jul 23 16:13, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > Matthew Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Given that Ubuntu takes things directly from Debian, and hence all > > Debian Developers have a vested interest in Ubuntu packages, would it > > make sense to (provide|ask ubuntu to provide) a way for

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Matthew Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Given that Ubuntu takes things directly from Debian, and hence all > Debian Developers have a vested interest in Ubuntu packages, would it > make sense to (provide|ask ubuntu to provide) a way for bug reports to > be manipulated by users with keys in t

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Mon Jul 21 14:07, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > > I do feed info upstream (via yet more website logins), I really can't > > > > add yet another one. > > > > I guess OpenID support will come to the rescue here. > > > It will help, if one wants to use the web interface. However, > > Launchpad acc

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Hi, On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 12:06:08PM +0200, Stephan Hermann wrote: > On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 21:59:37 +0200 > Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > * Stephan Hermann: > > >> What's the correct way to get it out of Unbuntu (universe)? I > > >> don't want to relicense it, but if asking polite

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 17:43 +0200, Loïc Minier wrote: > On Tue, Jul 22, 2008, Neil Williams wrote: > > > Consider debootstrapping Debian > > > from Ubuntu or vice versa, pbuilding in the same combinations, or > > > creating virtual machines. The same could apply to emdebian tools; of > > > co

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008, Neil Williams wrote: > Equally, I am upstream for various projects that have packages in Debian > - I am happy to use the BTS for upstream issues with those packages but > I know of many upstreams who would not consider scanning the BTS and > expect Debian to forward bugs to t

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008, Steve Langasek wrote: > Launchpad can already be used as an openid /provider/ today, but I haven't > heard anything to indicate it will allow logins via other openid providers; > is more information available about this somewhere? (I don't have more information; like you I j

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 02:46:01PM +1000, Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: > Steve Langasek wrote: >> And even if LP accepted other openid providers, one would still have to log >> in to LP the first time in order to configure which openid provider to use, >> which I guess is still

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 19:53 +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 05:32:31PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > > I ask because emdebian-tools isn't intended for Ubuntu either. See [0] - > > emdebian-tools also depends on server resources provided only by Debian > > (in this case, the p

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 05:32:31PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > I ask because emdebian-tools isn't intended for Ubuntu either. See [0] - > emdebian-tools also depends on server resources provided only by Debian > (in this case, the package repositories containing compatible packages > which I can

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 21:59:37 +0200 Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Stephan Hermann: > > >> What's the correct way to get it out of Unbuntu (universe)? I > >> don't want to relicense it, but if asking politely does not work, > >> it seems to be my only choice. > > > What needs to b

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Mon, 2008-07-21 at 08:17 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 12:58:39PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote: > > Allow me to come back to your blog post now if you don't mind: > > 1) you're saying Launchpad is another web-login to carry; I'm happy to > > report that Launchpad is movin

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Mon, 2008-07-21 at 12:58 +0200, Loïc Minier wrote: > > > > It is a bootstrapping problem - to build packages, you need the > > dependencies. Ubuntu does not have any ARM packages and the packages > > that we need to use are the ones with the most changes between Debian > > and Ubuntu. The patche

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Le Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 01:43:13PM -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit : >> >> You can close Launchpad bugs in Ubuntu packages from Debian. The "LP: >> ##" >> syntax lets bugs get autoclosed when your package is synced to Debian, or >> when it's merged

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Steve Langasek wrote: And even if LP accepted other openid providers, one would still have to log in to LP the first time in order to configure which openid provider to use, which I guess is still going to be more effort than some are interested in doing. :) It would certainly address the issu

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Package: qa.debian.org On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 08:55:40AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > In the Ubuntu wiki, there's > which is "intended to > provide practical information about Ubuntu specifically for Debian > developers." I've just added a ne

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 06:58:10AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: > Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008, Neil Williams wrote: > > > Which cannot be done without > > > yet-another-website-login-combo-to-use-once-and-lose-forevermore - > > > useless Ubuntu bug tracker. :-( >

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008, Ben Finney wrote: > > However, the above bug in the Debian BTS has been archived. Must > > we open another bug to ask for the change to be reverted? > > Perhaps you can use a GreaseMonkey script to remove it for you, or > request a

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008, Neil Williams wrote: > > Which cannot be done without > > yet-another-website-login-combo-to-use-once-and-lose-forevermore - > > useless Ubuntu bug tracker. :-( > > > > I do feed info upstream (via yet more website logins), I really

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

* Stephan Hermann: >> What's the correct way to get it out of Unbuntu (universe)? I don't >> want to relicense it, but if asking politely does not work, it seems >> to be my only choice. > What needs to be done to make it work on Ubuntu, too? debsecan needs to be patched to download CVE meta-da

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Mon, 2008-07-21 at 09:38 -0700, John H. Robinson, IV wrote: > Steve Langasek wrote: > > > > Launchpad can already be used as an openid /provider/ today, but I haven't > > heard anything to indicate it will allow logins via other openid providers; > > is more information available about this som

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 09:38:01AM -0700, John H. Robinson, IV wrote: > What is the problem with closing the Debian bugs in the Debian > changelog, and letting the Ubuntu MOTU (I hope I am using the right > terminology here) handle the Ubuntu bug tracking? No one is saying that Debian developers *

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Steve Langasek wrote: > > Launchpad can already be used as an openid /provider/ today, but I haven't > heard anything to indicate it will allow logins via other openid providers; > is more information available about this somewhere? > > And even if LP accepted other openid providers, one would st

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 09:26:30AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 01:43:13PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > You can close Launchpad bugs in Ubuntu packages from Debian. The "LP: > > ##" > > syntax lets bugs get autoclosed when your package is synced to Debian, or

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 12:58:39PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote: > Allow me to come back to your blog post now if you don't mind: > 1) you're saying Launchpad is another web-login to carry; I'm happy to > report that Launchpad is moving to openid [already commented in this > thread] Launchpad can

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 12:12:54PM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > ma, 2008-07-21 kello 09:26 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli kirjoitti: > > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 01:43:13PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > You can close Launchpad bugs in Ubuntu packages from Debian. The "LP: > > > ##" > > > syn

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008, Ben Finney wrote: > However, the above bug in the Debian BTS has been archived. Must we > open another bug to ask for the change to be reverted? Perhaps you can use a GreaseMonkey script to remove it for you, or request a cookie / URL parameter to hide it. -- Loïc Minier

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008, Neil Williams wrote: > How would you relicence it in a manner that prevents use in Ubuntu but > retains DFSG compatibility to remain in Debian main? [...] > I ask because emdebian-tools isn't intended for Ubuntu either. See [0] - > emdebian-tools also depends on server resourc

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008, Neil Williams wrote: > Which cannot be done without > yet-another-website-login-combo-to-use-once-and-lose-forevermore - > useless Ubuntu bug tracker. :-( > > I do feed info upstream (via yet more website logins), I really can't > add yet another one. I guess OpenID support

Re: Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

I found Osamu's original post to be very uplifting. Whilst your Ubuntu issue is something of importance and worth discussing, given the more pessimistic nature of the problem (and suggested solutions); it's a shame you've both hijacked Osamu's thread with it :( -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIB

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

ma, 2008-07-21 kello 09:26 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli kirjoitti: > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 01:43:13PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > You can close Launchpad bugs in Ubuntu packages from Debian. The "LP: > > ##" > > syntax lets bugs get autoclosed when your package is synced to Debian, or > >

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 01:43:13PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > You can close Launchpad bugs in Ubuntu packages from Debian. The "LP: ##" > syntax lets bugs get autoclosed when your package is synced to Debian, or > when it's merged by an Ubuntu developer. Very interesting, is it documented

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Moins, On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:05:47 +0200 Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Osamu Aoki: > > > I found some of my packages are offered as a part of Ubuntu archive. > > Same here. In my case (debsecan), it's a bit irresponsible because > the package doesn't really work on Ubuntu--bu

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Ben Finney wrote: > The Debian BTS should *only* report problems that can be solved from > within Debian, otherwise it's useless noise that leads to that section > being ignored even when it might have something important to say. > > However, the above bug in the Debian BTS has been archived. Must

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 2:13 AM, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You can close Launchpad bugs in Ubuntu packages from Debian. The "LP: ##" > syntax lets bugs get autoclosed when your package is synced to Debian, or > when it's merged by an Ubuntu developer. Thanks Steve, for this.

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Hi, On Mon, 2008-07-21 at 11:45 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > Le Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 01:43:13PM -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit : > > > > You can close Launchpad bugs in Ubuntu packages from Debian. The "LP: > > ##" > > syntax lets bugs get autoclosed when your package is synced to Debian,

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Le Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 01:43:13PM -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit : > > You can close Launchpad bugs in Ubuntu packages from Debian. The "LP: ##" > syntax lets bugs get autoclosed when your package is synced to Debian, or > when it's merged by an Ubuntu developer. Interesting... Does it work

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> The Debian BTS should *only* report problems that can be solved from >> within Debian, otherwise it's useless noise that leads to that section >> being ignored even when it might have something important to say. > >

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The Debian BTS should *only* report problems that can be solved from > within Debian, otherwise it's useless noise that leads to that > section being ignored even when it might have something important to > say. That should of course say “The Debian PTS sh

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 13:43 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > Hi Neil, > > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 05:32:31PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > > I ask because emdebian-tools isn't intended for Ubuntu either. See [0] - > > emdebian-tools also depends on server resources provided only by Debian > > (in th

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 19:57 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote: > > Why not detect if the system is really Debian and if not output > > "system type unsupported"? > > I tried that - it generates a bug report within Ubuntu that I can't > close from within Debian

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Hi Neil, On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 05:32:31PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > I ask because emdebian-tools isn't intended for Ubuntu either. See [0] - > emdebian-tools also depends on server resources provided only by Debian > (in this case, the package repositories containing compatible packages > wh

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > What's the correct way to get it out of Unbuntu (universe)? I'd suggest filing a bug, and perhaps advertise it on the relevant developer mailing lists. > I don't want to relicense it, but if asking politely does not work, it > seems to be my only c

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 19:57 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote: > Hi, > > On Sunday 20 July 2008 18:42, Florian Weimer wrote: > > Relicensing would involve moving the package to non-free, that's > > correct. > > Ui, I dint expect you really would want that. Why not detect if the system is > really Debia

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Sunday 20 July 2008 13:33, Neil Williams wrote: > On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 12:16 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > On Sunday 20 July 2008 12:05, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > * Osamu Aoki: > > > > I found some of my packages are offered as a part of Ubuntu archive. > > > > > > Same here. In my case

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Hi, On Sunday 20 July 2008 18:42, Florian Weimer wrote: > Relicensing would involve moving the package to non-free, that's > correct. Ui, I dint expect you really would want that. Why not detect if the system is really Debian and if not output "system type unsupported"? regards, Holger

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 12:16 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Sunday 20 July 2008 12:05, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Osamu Aoki: > > > I found some of my packages are offered as a part of Ubuntu archive. > > > > Same here. In my case (debsecan), it's a bit irresponsible because the > > package do

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 18:42 +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote: > * Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080720 14:57]: > > I think we should encourage packager to contact upstream with simple > > "hello!" message and he (or myself) should be part of active upstream ML. > > > > After all, we all are human.

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

* Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080720 14:57]: > I think we should encourage packager to contact upstream with simple > "hello!" message and he (or myself) should be part of active upstream ML. > > After all, we all are human. Friendly "hello" always helps people. > > I know this is not somethin

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

* Neil Williams: >> What's the correct way to get it out of Unbuntu (universe)? I don't >> want to relicense it, but if asking politely does not work, it seems to >> be my only choice. > > How would you relicence it in a manner that prevents use in Ubuntu but > retains DFSG compatibility to remai

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

2008/7/20 Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > * Osamu Aoki: > >> I found some of my packages are offered as a part of Ubuntu archive. > > Same here. In my case (debsecan), it's a bit irresponsible because the > package doesn't really work on Ubuntu--but it's not readily apparent to > potential u

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 18:05 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Osamu Aoki: > > > I found some of my packages are offered as a part of Ubuntu archive. Have you found any that are not? > Same here. In my case (debsecan), it's a bit irresponsible because the > package doesn't really work on Ubuntu--

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

Osamu Aoki wrote: > I think we should encourage packager to contact upstream with simple > "hello!" message and he (or myself) should be part of active upstream ML. When I had upstreams, I always used to do this. Often though, I'd wait until I had some patches to go with the "hello", to make the

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

On Sunday 20 July 2008 12:05, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Osamu Aoki: > > I found some of my packages are offered as a part of Ubuntu archive. > > Same here. In my case (debsecan), it's a bit irresponsible because the > package doesn't really work on Ubuntu--but it's not readily apparent to > potent

Re: Good communication with upstream is good idea

* Osamu Aoki: > I found some of my packages are offered as a part of Ubuntu archive. Same here. In my case (debsecan), it's a bit irresponsible because the package doesn't really work on Ubuntu--but it's not readily apparent to potential users. Furthermore, it uses server resources provided to