Re: Bug#573745: Please decide on Python interpreter packages maintainership
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.
> 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? 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).
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: