On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 17:24:51 +0100, Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> wrote: > Package: tech-ctte > Severity: normal > > Hello Technical Committee, > we'd like you to decide about how the Python interpreter packages > should be maintained in Debian. I've spent several hours since my last message communicating with the current Python maintainer, reading various mailing list threads and bug logs, and generally trying to understand the situation as best I can. It bothers me that what you've brought to the TC is a rant about your frustrations culminating in a request to remove someone else from their role, rather than a crisper articulation of what's wrong and a plan that explains how we should move forward. In my reading and discussion with others, there are hints about different agreements at different times between different people about how to handle various transitions, but as someone not party to the various discussions over time, I wish I could find a single, well articulated policy for Python in Debian. There are more people I want to talk to, and perhaps one or more of them will make everything clear to me... but I do not want to delay things further. I realize this may not be what you had in mind when you asked the TC to "decide about how the Python interpreter packages should be maintained in Debian", but now that you've opened Pandora's box, I believe we have a responsibility to understand the underlying problems that apparently have plagued Python policy for years, so that whatever decision we take will ensure the most positive outcome for Python handling in Debian in the future. I'm adding the DPL to this reply because it seems possible that the only way to achieve this objective might be an in-person Debian Python Summit meeting, moderated by members of the TC, where we can work through all the issues and come to consensus. Perhaps we can resolve our problems by email and/or IRC, but the mere existence of this petition to the TC and what it implies about communication disconnects makes me doubt that. Before I'll be willing to support any Technical Committee action on this petition, I believe we need a detailed and competent plan articulated, that explains how we get from where we are today to a single policy for Python in Debian, and that covers at least: 1) our philosophy for handling multiple Python interpreter versions 2) the supported approach(es) to packaging Python modules 3) an analysis of the effort involved and who needs to do what 4) a tentative schedule of milestones to completion, including what can and should be done before squeeze freeze 5) explicit commitment by involved parties to do the required work > transitions to force some controversial, unrelated technical > changes to be implemented before these transitions happen. I think this is a key part of the problem. The Python maintainer does not seem to believe that these are unrelated technical issues. And the controversy that does exist seems now to be more fueled by a combination of emotion and inertia than technical concerns. We need to get past that, and focus our attentions squarely on a good Python technical policy and associated implementation plan. I think everything else will flow fairly easily if we can accomplish that. Bdale
Attachment:
pgpWHbMkwxeKf.pgp
Description: PGP signature