Re: Bug#573745: Please decide on Python interpreter packages maintainership
Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 05:22, Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> wrote:
>> 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 should also be clear here that by "maintainers" I mean "at least some
of," not "all" for the reasons that Steve expressed.
> 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.
I don't want to jump too hard on this, but I have to go off on a bit of a
tangent here.
I don't think it's okay to say this. Whether or not it was a good use of
their time is their decision to make, not yours. Now, if what you're
saying is that you don't think that the situation has moved forward fast
enough, I do understand that, but most things in Debian happen slower than
at least some people would like to see them happen. But if by a huge
amount of time you're referring to the investment of effort and energy
that Scott and Piotr put into this, I don't think that's your call. It's
their decision how to spend their time.
This is a community, cooperative project. That means that getting along
with fellow developers *is actual work*, and is as important in some cases
as the technical work expressed in the packages that we upload.
> 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 don't think anyone's expecting you to do this. We clearly need to find
a solution that doesn't cause the problem to recur in a year.
> 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.
I'm not sorry that it came before the CTTE -- that's what we're here for,
and it's been causing serious problems for quite a while. I don't know to
what extent any improvement that's happened so far has been due to us so
far (it certainly hasn't been due to me), but it's also often the case
that when something shows up here, that tends to provide some impetus to
sorting out a solution.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: