Re: Let's be friends. (Non-maintainer uploads made easier)
> Hi,
>
> I have two comments on this:
> a) On a personal level, I feel uncomfortable assessing the competence
> level of people, and also feel I may be hurting feelings by any
> choices I make. This may be irrational, but I do feel that way.
> b) This is going to be done by convention anyway (unless you propose
> that dpkg-buildpackage refuse to build packages for non-friends
> ;-), so I see no reason to further bloat package files and the
> control headers with something like this. A better solution would
> be for the maintainers to register friends in a directory in
> master, and have dinstall consider them.
That proposal is very similar to what I proposed to do without modifying
dpkg. Frankly, I don't care where the data is put.
Note, BTW, that the friends are listed for each package, not for
each maintainer. So, I may list Joey Hess as "Friend" of menu,
and leave him out for my other packages. For example, I think
I would be able to be a "friend" of Joeyh's nextaw package. But
I would certainly not want to be a friend of any of his packages
that use perl.
> Frankly, what is wrong with the current informal
> non-maintainer upload process?
I, and the two other maintainers that until now contributed
to this thread do feel something is wrong. Not structurally, but
the fackt that there's only _one_ maintainer for every package
slow things down.
For example, with some packages I maintain, I _know_ there are several
other people who have at least as much knowledge of the package, and
I just happen to maintain that specific package. Now, when a bug comes
along when I'm on holiday, and some of the other maintainers happen
to have some time on their hands, they would at the moment not even
think about fixing the bug, but at best (when they know I'm on holiday)
mail to the bug-system "joost is on holiday, don't expect this to
be fixed until next month" (assuming the bug isn't security critical).
Now, I am unhappy with that. I would much rather that the other people,
when they happen to have time available while I'm on holiday, fix
my bugs (and I'll try to fix some of theirs while they are on holiday:).
On the other hand, if you prefer the old system, then the "Friends"
system I proposed doesn't change anything for you: just say
"Friends: none".
So, in short, the difference between being a "friend" of a package,
and they way it is now: A "friend" will be *encouraged* to make uploads,
to fix bugs etc, while the real maintainer is away. Also, as Joost Kooij
mentioned, we could setup master.debian.org so that mail for
package@debian.org would go to all friends of the package too.
> This should cover illness and vacations. Why do we need to restrict
> the set of people who may make non-maintainer uploads in general?
>
> Unless I am missing something, this proposal actually
> restricts the candidates for non-maintainer uploads; I also fail to
> see how it makes non-maintainer uploads any easier.
Yes, you are missing something: the "friends" uploads are considered
to be basically the same as maintainer uploads; the "friends" uploads
are *encouraged*. Maybe a better name of "friend" would
be "Vice-Maintainers", or, "Replacement-Maintainers", in that, when
the real maintainer is away, the "friends" take on the role of the
real maintainer.
If you don't like this, then there's nothing you need to do, just
don't list any friends with your packages.
For the people who *do* like it (like me), it takes away this bad
feeling I have everytime I leave my keyboard for more than 1 hour.
>
> Currently, I would only undertake a non-maintainer upload if I
> feel able and have the time. Having my name on a list will not make
> me either more able or give me more time
Then don't have your name on the list. Note that your name will only
be aded by the maintainer of a package. So, if the maintainer of foo
approaches you, and asks if you want to be a "friend of foo", then
you should only accept if you feel reasonably confident about handing
the "Vice-Maintainership" in case the real maintainer is on holiday.
> (not having my name on the
> list may send me into raving depressiona and have me writhing and
> fainting in coils on main street ;-)
Well, think of it this way: At the moment, all "Friends:" fields
are empty. So, your name actually isn't on the lists at the moment.
PS. I think "Vice-Maintainer" is a much more precice name than "Friend".
But myself, I much rather be a Friend of a package, than
a cold "Vice-Maintainer" -- that just doesn't sound friendly.
--
joost witteveen, joostje@debian.org
My spamfilter is so good, it correctly catches 90% of incoming spam,
*including* all email from my PhD supervisor.
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: