Re: The Debian Maintainers GR
* Raphael Hertzog (firstname.lastname@example.org) [070728 14:57]:
> On Sat, 28 Jul 2007, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > Oh crap. Why invent new comittees in the first place? And BTW, why don't
> > speak with DAM/FD/NM-committee first, before starting new things?
> > Rewirting from scratch is mostly not a good idea.
> Why are you setting up a buildd network not handled by the buildd admins
> and by DSA ? (No need to reply, it's just to show you the parallel)
I didn't knew up to now that we need a committee to run a buildd, and
that the committee of the buildds I maintain negotiates with the
committee of the buildds for unstable/main+contrib.
And, BTW, the buildd admins of the experimental buildds are in touch
with the buildd admins of the unstable buildds - and I discussed that
matter with Ryan and James before setting up the first buildds. Now you
might see the difference: Because in the buildd case, it makes sense to
distribute the load on more shoulders (and btw, it doesn't buy real
advantages to force the same people handling unstable to also care about
experimental). And there is a good working relationship between the
different admins. However, in the DM case, you didn't speak first with
the people knowing about the issues, but tried a rewrite from scratch.
And, apart from any issue what you needed to discuss - I don't think the
current proposal has a big enough usecase (please see what e.g. Russ has
written) to warrant it risks. Joergs proposal seems better to me.