Wine packages, universe maintainence, and myself
mh at codeweavers.com
Sun Jan 30 17:17:04 CST 2005
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 17:57:20 -0500, Vincent Béron wrote:
> That's something you need to sort out through Debian, not Ubuntu nor
> winehq. Each one of these projects have their own community and rules,
> and even if some parts of them overlap, they're still different
> Any attempt to use your position in one to force another one to your
> liking will result in grumbling.
> Moreover, you already know the steps to replace Ove as Debian's
> maintainer: file bugs in Debian's bug system, then provide fixes for
> them, one at a time. The only problem is you think that solution will
> take too long to reach the goals you'd like. But it's the only way to
> go. Any other way just won't work.
Hmm, I think it's fine for Scott to just work around Debian here. There's
no guarantee that just filing bugs one at a time will achieve anything,
right? While it is rather tempting to just say that Debian should sort
themselves out, unfortunately we still end up with random users running
bad packages so we get to pick up the pieces. I'd rather Scott provided
better packages even if it's not a part of Debian officially.
>> -PAX issues will inevitably come up again. This was an issue that came
>> up before, although with Ubuntu using the latest Wine it will certainly
>> be an easier one to tackle.
> More Ubuntu/PAX users developing Wine would help on finding and fixing
> more quickly those. But you can't force people to use a certain
Well, it's all a bit controversial isn't it. I'm absolutely not convinced
PaX reveals "bugs": so far on the list of things it breaks are such
fundamental programs as OpenGL and the Nautilus file manager. I for
one don't care much right now if Wine is on that list too, given that
I don't see how you can have a modern desktop with it enabled ...
More information about the wine-devel