Re: The unofficial buildd effort and its shutdown - my POV
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Ingo Juergensmann <ij@2004.bluespice.org> writes:
True, there's no formal process for people like me, although I proposed some
ideas for something like that some time ago, but that was put down as any
other idea, most likely by the same people that are now yelling loudly about
trust. It was put down for reasons like "That's nonsense! That can't be
done. Shut up, moron! If you want, become a DD!"
So... I'm a little confused. What do you mean "there's no formal
process for people like me"? The NM process certainly allows for
things other than package maintenance. What about you is not covered
by the existing process?
Yes you can do other things later, but its focussed on packaging and
maintaing packages.
[snip]
No. I don't want to become a DD, because I won't package any software
anyway, but NM process seems to be very much based on this kind of
stuff.
I don't see anything on the NM page that says you must be a software
packager to be a maintainer, but perhaps I missed this. Can you
explain in more detail? Were you told not to be a maintaner because
you didn't want to package, or what?
Thats not right, there are currently two NM processes,
first the classic NM process which is focussed on packaging
and maintaining packages, here you have to get a package
into the archive (I have several mails that prove that), to get
maintainer. On the other side there is a process for documentation
maintainers, as I currently know there is only of that maintainer existing
yet. This process is focussed on getting things documented. (XML, SGML,
docbook stuff). But there is no process that reflect the things a buildd
maintainer does.
Maybe we should create a process especially for people we have to trust
for several reasons, that don't wan't to get maintainers.
(Some kind of signation or advocate process).
Ingo for examples maintains buildds since I remember and I heard never any
complaints how (technically) they are maintained, so lets trust him.
I think every m68k user uses packages that are built on his buildd, this
was good
for several years and now its bad ? Thats a little bit stupid.
No, I can't apply as NM, because I will end up as Goswin did for sure. James
doesn't like me, so I never will have to succeed in NM process anyway. This
is my impression of how things go in Debian, therefore I'll not even try it.
I think this really doesn't amount to a hill of beans. I'm happy to
hear a complaint if you tried and were rejected for illegitimate
reasons. But to say "I never tried because I knew I would be
rejected" doesn't carry much weight. We don't even have your
say-soomas
to go on, because you might be wrong about whether you'd be rejected.
What exactly do you want?
I think he wants some official statement that he could continue his
work, without a new
moron that beginns to complain about new things next week.
Not quite. I find it quite annoying and useless to start such a discussion
about people (like me) that are doing exactly the same work for years and
suddenly this work seems wrong.
I didn't see anyone tell you to stop doing it. I see someone being
worried about a similar kind of work; I see people discussing an
issue. But nobody told you "don't do this"--moreover, nobody could
have! You could ignore them; nothing stops you from building anything
you like. At best, Debian could tell a developer to stop signing the
packages, but I don't think that happened either.
T
Sincerly
Alex
--
Alexander "formorer" Wirt KeyID: BC7D020A
EMail: formorer@debian.org ICQ: 28651245
Reply to: