Things are quite different now than they were 9 months ago when I got involved. They are significantly different now than when this bug was filed. Other than the question of when to make the initial upload of a new version of the Python interpreter to Unstable, most of the issues at the core of this request have to do with maintenance of the core Python system in Debian and Python policy. These are from python-defaults and python3-defaults. Both of these packages are now maintained by three DDs in a public VCS. I agree with the idea that maintenance of the interpreter packages should be broadened, but I think that the defaults packages which control default/supported versions and provide the Debian Python policy are the most important. I believe it is fair to state that more has been done to improve the technical state of Python in Debian in the last 9 months than in the previous 4 years. We are having a good discussion in the Debian Python community around what the Debian System for Python 3 will look like. No one is imposing anything (look at the recent archives of debian-python for the discussion). The history of Python in Debian is what it is, but I don't think that restructuring maintainership would solve any problems that we are actually having right now. It seems to me that this request has evolved significantly. Initially it was about broadening maintainership. Now that this is happening, it seems to be just about getting doko fired. I find that doko is perfectly willing to have reasonable discussions with people who are trying to work with him. I don't find it a bit surprising that he doesn't place a priority on dealing with people who are not. He's not always as responsive as I would like, but I'm not always as responsive as others would like either. None of us has unlimited time. As far as the Ubuntu versus Debian question, if you look at the python2.6 history you will see that back in April doko switched back to having Debian uploads lead Ubuntu uploads and since then has uploaded python2.6 to Debian 9 times. Currently the package is maintained in Debian and then merged with minor changes in Ubuntu. This is another aspect of the original complaint that is, in my opinion, no longer valid (personally, I don't understand how one can simultaneously exult Debian as being more careful and having higher quality standards than Ubuntu and complain that everything that's in Ubuntu should also be in Debian at the same time, but regardless, it's OBE). Scott K P.S. I am not subscribed to this bug, so if you want further comments from me, please cc me.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.