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