Re: Is Ubuntu a debian derivative or is it a fork?
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Is Ubuntu a debian derivative or is it a fork?
- From: Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com (va, manoj)>
- Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 01:59:18 -0500
- Message-id: <[🔎] firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Mail-followup-to: email@example.com
- In-reply-to: <20050601024719.GG5199@alcor.net> (Matt Zimmerman's message of "Tue, 31 May 2005 19:47:19 -0700")
- References: <20050531155615.GA15814@imsmail.imsmail.org> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20050531171738.GD15814@imsmail.imsmail.org> <20050531190244.GC27123@hell.pl> <20050531205225.GD17974@imsmail.imsmail.org> <email@example.com> <1117594160.3733.23.camel@kusturica> <20050601020033.GA4767@katherina.lan.complete.org> <20050601024719.GG5199@alcor.net>
On Tue, 31 May 2005 19:47:19 -0700, Matt Zimmerman <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 09:00:33PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
>> In the ubuntu case in particular, I wish that they would be more
>> proactive in sending their patches to the Debian maintainers.
>> Asking us Debian folk to go to an obscure site somewhere, wade
>> through listings of thousands of diffs, and find changes is
>> difficult. For example, Python 2.4 is in sid, and I don't mind
>> making my packages use it now. I'd appreciate any and all diffs
>> from ubuntu folks.
> I don't want to repeat the discussion about pushing patches; there's
> a perfectly reasonable one already in the list archives. There are
> good reasons why we do this the way that we do.
Well, while this may well be OK for how Ubuntu treats
upstream, Debian has long had a tradition of actively pushing
patches upstream. I collect, and test patches, I jump whatever hoops
upstream bug tracking makes me jump through, in order to push triaged
bug reports and fixes upstream.
I would hope Ubuntu is as proactive with its upstream as I
expect Debian to be.
> In the not-so-distant future, a huge proportion of Ubuntu
> development will take place in Arch branches, with the intent of
> promoting more efficient collaboration both within Ubuntu and with
All my development already happens in arch archives, and yet
I do not expect my upstreams to come trawling through my arch
repositories looking for fixes that my users have, and their other
users do not.
Indeed, with the number of Debian derived distributions
inching ever closer to the triple digit mark, it would be a
significant drain on my resources to have to discover where, if at
all, these 90+ distributions provide patches for my system, and try
to fish out relevant patches, determine what problem the patch was
trying to solve, and then go on to the next 30 source package X 90+
distribution repo on the list.
Obviously, I have no control over how derived distributions
conduct their business, or where they allocate resources. But I would
not consider doing development in a public repo an adequate
substitute for not pushing bug reports and fixes upstream, using
their BTS, for any of the packages I maintain.
Your good nature will bring unbounded happiness.
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C