Re: Bug#573745: Please decide on Python interpreter packages maintainership
Hello Russ,
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 05:22, Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> wrote:
> Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> writes:
>
>> Ok, probably I didn't express myself clearly enough. you are talking
>> about the future, when python will have co-maintainers (python*-default
>> already has them), am I correct?
>
> Right, yes.
>
>> I was referring instead to the current situation where python*-default
>> has co-maintainers while python interpreter packages still has not. It
>> seems to me that Matthias is still the key to make the architecture
>> works, since he controls interpreters and co-control (horrible
>> expression) the *-default, so without his ack (and so public discussion
>> when needed) we are stuck.
>
> I agree with the statement that maintainers of those packages need to be
> active in these discussions and be clear about what their requirements are
> and not block other work that's going on in Debian. I'm uncomfortable
> with the degree of personalization of the problem at present, although I
> do realize what some of the history behind that is.
I hope we also expressed some general aspects (above personalization)
of the problem, from a technical POV, not only feelings and such.
>> Probably it's also my fault in hoping things would have solved by
>> themselves and I've brought this to the CTTE too late, but please also
>> consider I've joined the debian-python after the 2006 (and like me many
>> others), so where all the problem origins tracks back. But the problem
>> is still actual, I think.
>
> But you do seem to agree that it's getting better?
Yes the situation is lightly better, and thanks to Scott and Piotr
that devoted a huge amount of time in pleasing Matthias with all his
requests before being accepted as co-maints, time that could have been
better invested in some actual work.
that said, am I unhappy of the situation? yes. am I going to shut up
and simply let the things be adjusted in private
conversations/agreements and then face the same problems in a year?
sorry, no. I consider a challenge to find a proper solution (sorry we
appealed to CTTE for this task) but we should guarantee a steady
resolution to this mess, once and for all, whatever it is.
> The problems were deep
> and aren't going to be solved overnight, and I agree that we don't want to
> stall short of a solution, but I think it's important to recognize that
> the situation is improving (if it is).
Yes, it is, but I don't consider that the ultimate solution. We have
now comaints for python*-defaults and an updated policy, and it's a
huge leap forward, but we have not done yet.
Regards,
--
Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu)
My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
Reply to: