On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 03:48:37PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > Additionally, as DPL, I'm worried by seeing packages as important as the > > Python interpreters maintained by a single person. Even if all other > > surrounding issues were not there, that would be a bus-factor problem > > worth fixing by itself. (I concede there are other similar situations > > in the archive, but this is no excuse; they are just other problems to > > be solved.) <snip> > Team maintenance is a reasonable practice to encourage, because in many > cases this will reduce the average turnaround on bugs; but that's not true > in all cases, and treating this as a "problem to solve" maligns the enormous > contributions of single maintainers to Debian over the years. The TC should > concern itself here with ensuring that the python packages are well > maintained and the python ecosystem within Debian is healthy, using > /whatever maintenance structure works best for the developers involved/, and > take no position on the essentially political question of team maintenance > as a rule. I do agree that whether the Python interpreter packages are team maintained or not should not be a concern of CTTE. I disagree with your evaluation of the risks, for Debian, of one-man-show maintenance for important packages and I'll be glad to discuss this, but doing that here would most likely be off-topic. My mention above was more of an extra motivation of mine for delving into this, than an argument that the CTTE should have taken into account. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7 zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/ Quando anche i santi ti voltano le spalle, | . |. I've fans everywhere ti resta John Fante -- V. Capossela .......| ..: |.......... -- C. Adams
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature