[ Disclaimer: Random bits from my brain only ]
Il 05/07/2010 19.45, Scott Kitterman ha scritto:
> 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.
Having a real and active team behind python{,3}-defaults is surely a
nice improvement, so more people are responsible for such an important
piece in Debian, and can help Matthias when too busy in other tasks,
which could not be directly related to his job: being an Ubuntu
developer myself, I don't think wearing a Ubuntu (or Canonical) hat has
been "the" issue, several people already showed the opposite with facts.
> 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).
One of the requests of the Debian Python community, and of those who
initially filed this bug, was proper communications with developers in
order to help them to handle interpreter, policy and packaging changes
in the safest way. In the past, we rarely see "Bits from Python
maintainer"-like emails, and no consequent discussions were held to
understand or to improve things.
In these last months, several emails and IRC discussions took place, and
I believe this is the greatest improvement we (as the whole community
behind Debian and Python) achieved. Someone might argue Matthias didn't
took a strong part in those discussions, and I'd like to hear his
opinions more often given his long-time commitment and experience in
maintaining Python stack. This is not to force him to share the load,
but instead to share knowledge and let other people do things the right way.
I also read people saying the initial bug authors didn't work towards
python2.6 transition. I have to argue this is definitely false.
Transition has been conducted by a lot of different people, and it is
hard to say who did more and who did less, because everyone contributed
in a way or another (e.g. Jakub also filed a lot of bugs, Sandro also
uploaded a lot of NMUs, and I also prepared binNMUs for python2.6 as
supported version, but no credit was due...). I don't want public
blessing, and I'm sure nobody does because we all care about having
things done instead of having names written on a public wall, just we
don't have to fall into this minefield: it only increase hated
discussions without going anywhere useful, and distract from our goal.
Things are moving, and this is good. There are several things to be
discussed and implemented before we can claim Python issue solved. I
believe Scott and Piotr are great guys with strong technical and social
skills, but now that Python maintenance has been broadened, giving other
interested people the concrete possibility to work on Python interpreter
or *-defaults should be encouraged: everyone deserves a chance, and we
can't let personal grugde to prevent that to happen.
--
.''`.
: :' : Luca Falavigna <dktrkranz@debian.org>
`. `'
`-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature