Core-Dev Application: Till Kamppeter

[Till Kamppeter]

Stefan Potyra wrote:
> I guess you're missing the core points:
> 
> - files in /usr/local [1]

The /usr/local looked inevitable for me in the beginning, as the drivers 
are closed-source, so I accepted packages installing into /usr/local. 
Later on the idea of binary patching (replacing string "/usr/local" by 
"/usr/././." came up and users were asked to test packages with this 
change. It seemed to work with actual printers and so this binary patch 
was used to get more policy-conforming packages.

> - the orig.tar.gz reconstructed, w.o. a hint what's in there and how it got 
> reconstructed

This is a bad thing and I have asked the contributors to fix this. They 
later on decided to use the original binary DEB files as upstream 
sources to improve maintainability.

> - lots of unneeded "transitional" packages [2]
>

As the contributors introduced the transitional packages for me it 
looked like a good idea to let auto-updates replace the installed 
original packages by Ubuntu packages. For me the clutter of the high 
amount of transitional packages was not such an issue. In a real-live 
system they also do not get all installed, but only one for each 
installed original Brother package (taking also into account that one 
could only install one original Brother package at a time due to file 
conflicts, it was only one transitional package installed).

> hm... I'm getting a little bit sceptical, when you wrote that pitti gave the 
> 2nd ACK. Why would he first review a package, and later reject it from 
> source-new? [3].

As he already told by himself, he has asked me to upload (so that the 
packages go into NEW) and only then reviewed. Then he saw the 
world-writable file and because of this he rejected the packages.

    Till