[jerome: Re: [Zope] Re: Common issue: Maintainance of Zope products]

[Jerome Alet]

--h31gzZEtNLTqOjlF
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

Sorry, CC to the list forgotten.


--h31gzZEtNLTqOjlF
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 09:04:59 +0200
To: "Tille, Andreas" <TilleA@rki.de>
Subject: Re: [Zope] Re: Common issue: Maintainance of Zope products
Message-ID: <20020514070459.GD10196@port50-2.unice.fr>
References: <20020514063018.GC10196@port50-2.unice.fr> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0205140835370.22917-100000@wr-linux02.rki.ivbb.bund.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0205140835370.22917-100000@wr-linux02.rki.ivbb.bund.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i

On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 08:42:24AM +0200, Tille, Andreas wrote:

> Well, I think you used the wrong tag: <offtopic> might be appropriate
> but I see no reason for flamewar if there are true issues rised.  You
> are completely right that some Zope products are very bad maintained
> in Debian.  I just cared for some products in a so called Non Maintainer
> Upload (NMU) because the maintainer did not care about his tasks.

I wasn't specific about Zope products at all in my rant, sorry. In fact the problem
I have encountered have nothing to do with zope or its products, and I'm very glad
of the current packaging of the Debian Zope and Zope products I use (I don't use all,
however).

I'll answer your PS privately since these are not Zope products.

thx for your reaction.

Jerome Alet

--h31gzZEtNLTqOjlF--