Re: No response from official maintainer
Hello, Sandro,
thanks for you kind reply
2010/9/3 Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> wrote:
> Sadly, this absence of reply is not something surprising me (and
> others I think, as also Paul discovered[0]). This lack of
> communication, interest and the overcommitting of Matthias is what has
> made us call to the Technical Committee about Python maintainership.
> Given this is a perfect example of what we wanted to show, I add the
> TC bug in CC, to also show that situation is still going on.
>
> [0] http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2010/09/msg00018.html
>
>> I'd like to know what steps should be done so I could work on this
>> package in future without being misunderstood.
>
> For such situations, it's always better to publicly send your "pings"
> (the email you sent privately to Matthias about the status of the
> package) using the Debian BTS for example, like you did (but only
> partially) in [1]. Also, directly add in CC Matthias, even for bugs on
> his packages, so there won't be any comments like "ah, but he was not
> directly in the loop" (yes, this happens...), so I'm doing it now,
> even if Romain already did[2], without any public reply from Matthias.
Thanks for the hints.
> [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=587313
> [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2010/08/msg00268.html
>
>> That conversation also showed me some things on Debian release
>> management I didn't know about
>> (http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2010/08/msg00264.html). I
>> understood that the package cannot be uploaded to unstable since it
>> could pass to testing just with the flow of time without any humanity
>> checks. But I know nothing concerning upload to experimental branch
>> and its policy. Can you advice any documents or other information
>> sources on these policies concerning approving huge changes in the
>> package structure?
>
> I am too lazy to check :) but you probably can find something about
> the "freeze" process in the Debian policy and/or Developers Reference.
> Just to do a very brief recap, during a freeze any upload to unstable
> won't transition to testing (that will be the new stable) unless
> accepted by a Release Team member. Experimental is "free to use" for
> cases like yours, so the buildbot upload has to be targetting
> experimental, and be tested there until we release and then be
> uploaded to unstable.
Thanks, I'll search a bit harder there. Does this means all the
packages uploaded to mentors are going to unstable by default? Should
I directly specify the target branch in an RFS (not for this case but
in common)?
>> Another question I am worried about is a quality of my solution made
>> in the package. I believe it is not bad but I feel there's could be
>> better ways to do that. Can you please advice where I can discuss my
>> solution and the way to improve them?
>
> Given it's a python application, you'd be much welcomed to join[3] the
> PAPT[4] and maintain the package there. In any case, you can discuss
> python "stuff" packaging on debian-python@lists.debian.org and for
> fast replies on IRC on #debian-python channel on irc.debian.org
> server.
>
> [3] http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/PythonModulesTeam/HowToJoin
> [4] http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/PythonAppsPackagingTeam
Thanks for the invitation! Hope I can be useful.
Thanks again.
--
with best regards, Andriy Senkovych
Reply to: