With the precious help of Phil and Sam, here comes a draft ballot. It is
attached to this mail, and has been committed to the TC's git repository [0].
It contains the following ballot options:
> - Option A - Reaffirm Ron Lee as 'global' maintainer (§6.1.2)
> - Option B - Declare Wookey as 'global' maintainer (§6.1.2)
> - Option C - Decline to rule, consider case closed
> - Option FD - Further discussion
I hereby open the discussion period, and welcome any amendments on the
background, rationale, ballot options or the closing words, of course. Please
apply english wording and all 'obviously consensual' fixes directly in git.
I would like to be able to start a vote on Monday.
--
Cheers,
OdyX
[0] https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/debian-ctte.git/tree/
841294_global/draft
# Background
* In #841294, the Technical Committee was asked to overrule the
maintainer of the 'global' package to get a new upstream version
packaged.
* As a matter of fact, at the time #841294 was filed, the 'global'
package's latest upload to unstable had happened in October 2010,
despite several requests for newer 'global' upstream releases and
bugreports.
* The discussion, involving various people ranging from bugreporters,
Debian contributors, the 'global' maintainer, and some TC members, has
clarified two lines of argumentation around the maintenance of the
'global' package':
- global is fine as it is, version numbers are no silver-bullet, and
there are severe problems in the new upstream versions, that are
being discussed with upstream. New features could always be
backported to the Debian version if worthwhile bugs were reported.
- there's a rightful expectation to get new upstream versions, even if
they introduce regressions or functionality losses. No amount of
upstream problems justify holding new versions back over multiple
release cycles.
# Rationale
* Our Social Contract's "We don't hide problems" implies that
maintainers go through reasonable effort to make their packages'
problems visible; and the usual way is to use the Debian bug tracker.
It also implies reporting upstream flaws to upstream, ideally in public.
Adding references to the BTS would avoid the impression that nothing had
been done.
* Integrating recent versions of upstream software is a maintainers'
duty, as Debian is a primarily a software distribution; distributions
exist to facilitate users' access to upstream software. Uploading recent
versions and making them available to Debian users on a somewhat regular
basis is our way to find, address and correct problems brought in by new
upstream releases. The 'experimental' suite exists explicitly for the
purpose of testing software not immediately suitable for release towards
future stable releases.
* If the maintainer decides that our users will be best served by not
upgrading, this should be explicitly stated. The README.Debian file
of the package would be a good place to do this, as well as in response
to bugs requesting upgrades.
* The argument that features could easily be backported would carry
significantly more weight if there was evidence of patches for past
bugs being acted upon in a timely manner.
# Ballot
- Option A - Reaffirm Ron Lee as 'global' maintainer (§6.1.2)
- Option B - Declare Wookey as 'global' maintainer (§6.1.2)
- Option C - Decline to rule, consider case closed
- Option FD - Further discussion
# Closing words
We invite all interested parties to contribute in good faith for the
best possible 'global' package. Filing bugs with appropriate severities
is every user's duty, and it is important that those who understand the
package best continue to provide their best inputs.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.