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

Re: [New maintainer] Working for Debian and becoming a registered Debian developer

>Because Debian is something great, that must stay great. 

Another point of agreement.

>We need to check if the developer is able to do his task. We must be able
> to check that he fully agrees with our views about free software. 

How does a phone call accomplish this?  You cannot test either beliefs or 
packaging ability over the phone. The previous sentence may very well
be my own opinion.

>The new maintainer team did not take any decision. But as is stands,
>people who want to correct release critical bugs, who want to adopt
>orphaned packages and so on, are the more likely to be processed first
>because they are those that can help in improving Debian's quality right
>now. That's why you read this advice on some of the lists ...
>Other developers (that want to package new programs) will also be
>processed (we do not want to descriminate people) but maybe later.

My point was that you ARE discriminating - in a manner that debian
developers agree with.

>> whatever else they are interested in.  If they don't want to do what YOU
>> want, then they are not allowed to play.
>Not yet while we have about 300 release critical bugs and more than 3500
>packages to update (for policy 3.0.0 compliance).

There is no 'frozen' disrtibution, last time I checked - ergo there are no
bugs that, in themselves, are preventing the release from happening
tomorrow.  Yes, the number of bugs is an issue.  And I can see the benefit
of urging people to work on them.

But I cannot think of a reason that new maintainers cannot work on new,
unstable packages, with the knowledge that their new packages will have to
wait until the second release to make stable.  

The idea of the stable/frozen/unstable system was that unstable packages
don't hold up the release of the stable packages, except in the case of a
few base packages that have to be included.  These base packages are
outside of the scope of this conversation, since they will not be adopted
by the new maintainers in question. 

>But they'll be able to play later.

Ah.  What if they leave first?


Reply to: