ubuntu-389-directory-server team mailing list archive

[Kai-Cheung Leung <kcleung@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Actually I was the person who drafted the spec and earmarked it for
the UDS, but this does not attract attention.

Now I know you, and would you please have a look at and advocate *all*
389 packages, since you know them so well.  Then they will attract
more attention and they just need one more advocation to make it into
Karmic.

It would be a shame if Ubuntu still does not have the 389 server!!!!

On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 2:39 AM, David Sugar<david.sugar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I have only been trying to get my sipwitch package in since the start of
> Jaunty.  But yes, I agree, and not just speaking about 389, or even
> sipwitch, we do have clearly ready packages waiting in revu that seem to
> get stalled or otherwise forgotten after they have been worked on by the
> original submitter, corrected, and are now basically ready for archive.
> Looking at some of them, this has been the case even over multiple
> Ubuntu releases.  It is also not that we have an overwhelming number of
> such packages waiting that I can see.  I think this is bad because when
> this happens it clearly discourages further participation in the
> process, and that is not what anyone wants to see happen.
>
> I will add that while it could make sense to go through Debian and then
> try to get a package into Ubuntu as a merge request, my own personal
> experiences in Debian in respect to getting new packages in if you do
> not know anyone there have actually been far worse to date, and over a
> period of years.
>
> In the case of 389, I find it particularly unfortunate that nobody had
> chosen to look at it before me, especially given that it was identified
> as a spec for Karmic and topic at UDS, for things like the naming issues
> could clearly have been identified and resolved early, and other issues
> were clearly small and easy to resolve.  At present I see no reason for
> it not to move forward, although I choose not to review each related
> package as I had hoped others who could advocate and archive it would
> look at the remaining ones and would become involved.
>
> Maybe the place to start is to contact whomever was responsible for the
> spec at UDS.  Another approach I could suggest is to bring it up at one
> of the community council irc meetings and/or a related Karmic release
> meeting.  Maybe I should also look at the remaining packages in the interim.
>
> Leung, Kai-Cheung wrote:
>> I saw the packages being uploaded to our ppa and revu.  However there
>> are no movements in REVU and are many 389-related packages are not
>> reviewed.
>>
>> David, We really need to get our packages approved and entered into
>> Jaunty before the 389 can make unto Jaunty!
>