Re: Co-maintainership of base packages by the debian-boot team?
"Karl M. Hegbloom" wrote:
>
> >>>>> "Adam" == Adam Di Carlo <adam@onshore.com> writes:
>
> Adam> Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> writes:
> >> [ ... ]
> >> all the disgusting stuff basedisks.sh has to do in the boot-floppies to
> >> create a debian base system. A lot of packages need to be cleaned up
> >> before we can just dpkg -i `cat base-debs` and have it work. I'd prefer
> >> to go with something that already works here to save time on the first
> >> cut.
>
> Adam> Yes. More care should be given to the base set. We need to file bugs
> Adam> now, and agressively, against them.
>
> I have a better idea. Let's take out the "middle man" somewhat...
>
> Adam> A lot of people blame bf for delaying release but in fact we spent
> Adam> much of our time waiting for fixes in base or kernels.
>
> Why wait around for someone else, who may be busy with something in
> their own immediate surroundings? I think we should *negotiate* to
> become co-maintainer's of those packages. Perhaps we should
> institute this in Policy? That the `debian-boot' team is the
> co-maintainer of each base package, giving us rights to make uploads,
> etc??? Should I attempt to draft a proposal? That would make each
> of the maintainers of base packages a member of our team. Each would
> retain main control over their package perhaps?
>
Something like this would be handy, there are a few packages that we
could need debconf scripts for, if we could get our scripts into package
then we may not need to dop so many debinst modules, we could just use
the proper package and perhaps strip docs from them on the fly.
We probably should have a list of modules that we may need, and the
packages they depend on.
e.g.
network->dhcp client->pump
partitioning->fs->reiser
partitioning->lvm
partitioning->raid
I think it would take a lot of time to do something like this (changing
policy).
Glenn
Reply to: