[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#750135: Status of #750135 (Maintainer of aptitude package)


[In the following "Daniel" always refers to Daniel Hartwig, not to
Daniel Burrows. Daniel Burrows is no more involved in Aptitude's
development for quite a while. He's of course still welcome to
continue to contribute to Aptitude, at least from my point of view.]

Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Mar 2015, Javier Barroso wrote:
> > Sincerely I would expect this bug to be solved in less than a year. It
> > has to been frustrating to be at Manuel circunstances. I know CTTE has
> > been very very very busy , I'm understand this is not the biggest
> > issue, but 8 month of not activities on git should be sufficient to
> > give the power to Manuel and tell to Daniel to have a collaborative
> > aptitude
> The CTTE certainly has not been very active on this issue. That's
> definitely our problem, but as near as I can tell, none of the parties
> have been very active either.

No wonder. Daniel has kicked Manuel out of the Alioth project (at
least revoked his commit access), so Manuel can't really do any coding
work on Aptitude.

I must say that I'm not happy at all about this (IMHO anything else
but kind) move. Daniel might argue that this was necessary, but I

> Currently unresolved questions from me are the following:
> 1) Is there still a conflict here?

I fear so. I'd be happy to see Manuel back working on Aptitude, since
I haven't seen any commit or mail from Daniel in like 9 months or so.
But since Daniel kicked him out...

Actually, I'd like to see _both_ working on Aptitude again as they
approached mostly different sets of issues. Daniel mostly seemed to
work on a few bigger issues while Manuel fixed a lot of smaller, but
partially quite annoying issues.

> 2) What would a resolution of this conflict look like to the parties?

One thing which came to my mind was to revoke Alioth Project Admin
privileges from any of the conflicting parties to avoid such power
games in the future.

But then again, I didn't want to become part of those power games I'd
like to get rid of.

OTOH, if Daniel continues to be as MIA as he looked like in the past
year, we need a new Aptitude maintainer anyways. So it seems obvious
to me to put Manuel back in charge if he still wants to work on
Aptitude. A good date for making such a cut seems to be the start of
the Stretch release cycle, i.e. directly after the Jessie release.

Not having to take this decision on my own (for the reasons outlined
above), but having multiple other developers (e.g. the Tech CTTE)
backing an decision (whichever it will be) would be helpful, because I
really do not want to come under fire from any of the two parties.

I also suggested to use feature branches and reviewing them on the
mailing list before merging to not get in conflict during coding. But
despite some agreeing e-mails, this seemed to be of no avail.

> FWICT, it looks like Axel is also working on aptitude development;

Nope, not on development. I'm just doing bug triage and other
administrative stuff like caring about
https://aptitude.alioth.debian.org/. Doing C++ development is not what
I'm good at. (One of the reasons why I'm listed in Uploaders.)

You can count on me to continue doing Aptitude bug triage, sponsoring
Aptitude uploads, testing Aptitude releases, administrating the
Aptitude project on Alioth, maybe even do commits with regards to
packaging, documentation and typos. I'm a heavy Aptitude user and I
don't want to see it die, so that's how I try to contribute as I can't
do the C++ coding.

> what is his opinion of this issue?

At some point I had given up to get Daniel and Manuel working together
without attacking or provoking each other. But in some way, that's
still what I would like to see.

In the long run I'd like to see even more people working on Aptitude.

But for that, a possessive lead developer or power games are quite
hindering. IMHO one of the reasons Aptitude's development stalled
again are those power games we've seen. So I'd prefer a solution where
people who want to do stuff are also able to do it -- without getting
harassed by other people involved.

		Regards, Axel
 ,''`.  |  Axel Beckert <abe@debian.org>, http://people.debian.org/~abe/
: :' :  |  Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
`. `'   |  4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329  6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5
  `-    |  1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486  202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: