On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 08:09:59AM +0200, Sandro Tosi wrote: > >> I doubt it won't... and you completely skipped the most important > >> part, let me requote it: "Sure, and doko took part in exactly zero > >> discussions". This is the Problem we want to solve, not it's not > >> solved and it won't be without a strong action. > > I'm a little unclear on what you're saying here, because if your goal is to > > get Matthias to participate in Python discussions, unseating him as the > > Python maintainer against his will is pretty obviously not going to change > > that. > I was just stating that in the discussions happening during the last > months, Matthias didn't participate in any of them. Please consider > that except for python*-default, he is still the sole maintainer for > all the python interpreter packages, so there's no-one else able to > speak in his behalf when something touching python "core" is discussed > but him. Sure, I understand that this is where things sit today; and I think there's pretty broad agreement that this isn't where we want to be. I'm just trying to make sure we also agree on where we *do* want to be. You seemed to be saying that Scott's proposal didn't address the problem because the problem was "Doko not participating in discussions", but I don't think this is the problem *per se*. I think I understand your position better now, thanks. > > If there's a maintenance team that inclues some members who handle the tasks > > of communicating with the broader community, and some members who prefer to > > avoid mailing list discussions - for whatever reason - and instead work on > > the technical bits behind the scenes, and everyone within that team is happy > > with the arrangement, why should anyone else care if a single member within > > that team doesn't communicate? > I'm not that happy about silent team members (you can always have the > impression of them doing nothing / avoiding discussion for some > unexpressed reasons, such as those that lead us to this appeal) but if > the other co-maints are fine with it, that's their business. For sure, > I think we should avoid to have a PR sub-team that simply forward the > community questions to the non-PR sub-team for tech replies and then > be forwarded in public. > I can see where you want to go, I *hope* you are right and it will > work, but my doubts still holds. Well, I think Scott was arguing that this is the direction things are already headed. I'm just spot checking if there is some reason I've overlooked why this would be insufficient. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature