Comment # 16 on bug 1205096 from Eric Schirra

(In reply to Atri Bhattacharya from comment #14)
> (In reply to Dominique Leuenberger from comment #13)
> > 
> > * rsvg over inkscape
> > 
> > 
> > Now, looking at inkscape vs rsvg-convert, this won't be a very easy anser to
> > give:
> 
> It is, from the point of view of a packager who needs to test their builds
> locally, and could do without downloading a ~100 MB+ worth of unnecessary
> cruft when downloading one single-digit MB sized package will suffice. Ditto
> for each obs-worker building the package.
> 
> It isn't just build chains that is in question here (although yes that too).
> 
> Anyway, my question to you is really more focused on whether it is allowed
> to submit forks of packages that are already in Factory to get around
> disagreements with the original package maintainer of the magnitude seen
> here (obviously with the appropriate conflicts etc. baked in).
> 
> I mean, I have (IMO) several improvements to the package that I am now
> simply unwilling to submit via obs://network/nextcloud-desktop or any other
> route that goes via the original maintainer. I could either just let my
> changes die and rot or submit as a new package.

@Dominique.
And here we would like to point out once again that his requests for changes
have been implemented in a slightly modified form.
And in such a way that all their wishes have been fulfilled.
But he simply does not want to admit it. He also does not respond to my
explanations.
Sorry, but he behaves like a small child who doesn't get exactly what he wants.