[Jonas Smedegaard] > It is too hard to read the changelogs where it is (or at least should > be) clearly documented who from a team did what parts of the > packaging. I agree that it's too hard, but I don't agree with the rest of that. The debian changelog doesn't typically say much about who's doing the testing, who's reproducing the bugs, who's forwarding bugs upstream and working with upstream to resolve them, and several other tasks the debian maintainer is expected to do. Nor does the debian changelog typically give an accurate picture of how easy or hard each line item was to achieve. Nor does it explain anything about whether the person who added the line items got them right or wrong, whether anyone else is covering for his mistakes before a package is finally uploaded. Much fuller pictures emerge from the combined logs of the version control system and the BTS, but estimating who is doing "most of the work" on a package based on *those* logs is a tedious and subjective process. This tedious and subjective process isn't something I'd expect an AM or DAM to want to undertake. Particularly when an example of solo maintenance is available to analyse instead. The most "credit" I'd expect any NM candidate to get from a team-maintained package is a few words of endorsement from co-maintainers. > > > I think Debian needs to emphasize teams packaging, not just > > > individuals for many reasons. > > > > We've had this conversation already. So I'll skip it. > > Please provide a reference to that discussion. google://site:lists.debian.org+team+maintenance The first hit is a great example, http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/08/msg00712.html and a rather long thread following. The fat subthread starting at http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/12/msg01055.html is another. It surprises me that you missed both of those threads. If you are interested in promoting team maintenance, I suggest you read them in the archives, to avoid repetition. Team maintenance, and the advantages and disadvantages thereof, is a very old and tired subject.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature