Re: package ownership in Debian
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 16:27:26 +0000, Gustavo Franco <email@example.com> said:
> On 7/29/06, Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 14:38:52 -0300, Gustavo Franco
>> <email@example.com> said:
>> > * Promote NMU LowThreshold wiki list giving it some official
>> > status.
>> What does this mean?
> That you're out of date on what's going on and trying to make jokes
> of my opinions before reading for a second time.
Actually, it just reinforces my view that you jump to wild
conclusions with inadequate data.
> FYI, http://wiki.debian.org/LowThresholdNmu
*Sigh*. I see I'll have to use non polysyllabic words here.
I know about the LowThresholdNmu page. What exactly do you
mean about giving it "official status"?
>> > I think with something similar to what i wrote above we will end
>> > up with almost all the packages maintained by groups and some
>> > packages maintained by Debian as a whole and not individuals.
>> > The next step would be groups allowing other groups to upload
>> > some of "their" packages.
>> I am mostly unconvinced that this would improve the quality of
> Yes, so let us keep the lack of communication and "my packages,
> don't touch team" approach or do you have suggestions for the
> problems on the table? Don't you see any problem?
We have a policy on NMU's. I think the release team has
authorized 0-day NMU's, while following the rest of the NMU
guidelines (nmudiff to the BTS, etc), in order to correct lacunnae in
There is nothing wrong with offering to help out with packages
either -- and nothing wrong with people forming teams. Rammning it
down people's throats won't work, though.
> My experience with Debian Python Modules Team, pkg-ltsp and
> pkg-gnome, show me that groups, communication in these groups,
> cooperation from non DDs are better than "mail me and i'll reply in
> two weeks...". Again, my point isn't that every package should be
> under group (as in alioth) maintenance, some packages would be under
> group maintenance as in Debian under some less restrict rules for
> NMU along the lines Joerg's wrote.
You have examples pro teams. There are also anecdotes where
teams do not work. Teams are akin to marriages: somethimes they work
wonderfully, other times they result in the analogue to a nasty
divorce. Even worse are teams that function like bad marriages: there
is tension in the air, people distrust other members on the team,
commits are reverted with no discussion, changes are made to SVN
trees without any discussion, and the whole project suffers.
So, if teams form naturally, and work well, that great.
Mandating it from up on high is not.
"Taxes? We don't need no stinking taxes." Jeff Daiell
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C