Re: How does team maintenace of python module works?
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> wrote:
> On 02/14/2013 04:53 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>>>> If the team is in Maintainer field, I think you can freely upload the
>>>> new version. See
>>>> <http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/PythonModulesTeam/HowToJoin#Policy_About_Maintainer_and_Uploaders_Fields>
>>>> for details.
>>
>> Bug fixing is always fine for team-maintained pkgs, but just throwing
>> a new upstream release into the repository and they disappear is *not*
>> what team maintenance is for
It's a warning
> What makes you think that this is the kind of behavior that I will
> adopt? Please don't without giving me the opportunity to do maintenance
> work. Also, the fact that I'm introducing myself and asking what the
> team rules is a good sign that I really do intend to do team work, and
> integrate with whatever your work-flow is.
I hadn't implied that you will, but since you haven't done any work
for the team yet (the history thing?), it's good to explain the
expectations before.
>> (which might be the situation at hand
>> given zigo just joined and we don't have any history); so please at
>> least try to get in contact with the uploaders first (isn't it xnox?)
>
> I did and received no reply. See:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=699147
you can ask again at least.
> which is what made me ask in this list, as I really need the module to
> be updated (it's a build-dependency of other things I maintain).
>
> Now, I will continue to use SVN for the modules maintained inside the
> team, but I don't think I will put my currently maintained python
> modules in SVN, as I prefer Git.
sure, just don't put them under DPMT maintainership then.
> IMO, it's not very nice that you don't at least give the choice, and
> impose an inferior VCS, especially considering that most (in fact,
> currently *absolutely all*) upstream authors of the python modules I
> maintain are using Git (and github), which makes it quit convenient to
> use Git.
>
> Is there a valid reason despite history? Is there a chance that this
> rule may be reconsidered? It'd be really nice, as I'm sure I wouldn't be
> the only one happy with such decision.
please stop the discussion now, and accept what the team is currently using.
--
Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu)
My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
Reply to: