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

Successful and unsuccessful Debian development tools

Dear fellow developers,

As many of you know, I am conducting research on Debian,
specifically on how Debian developers adopt or reject new methods of
package maintenance. I would like to get a broad collection of data
for the first part of my research, which is the study of tools that
have been successfully adopted or which have been rejected (so to
speak) by the developer crowd.

While I already have a good selection, I am on the look for more.
Do you know of a good example of a tool that has successfully shaped
Debian development for a large number of people? Or do you remember
a tool that tried but horribly failed? Those are much harder to
find. :)

I have Reply-To set for fear of horrible flame wars when one DD
bashes another one's favourite tool, but I will make the results
public, obviously. Thus, I appreciate if you could take the time to
drop me a short note if you have an opinion on the matter.

I will be blogging about recent developments some time soon,
specifically about the change in direction of my research, so watch
[0] or just read the planet [1] if you are interested.

0. http://blog.madduck.net/phd
1. http://planet.debian.org


Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
 .''`.     martin f. krafft <madduck@debian.org>
: :'  :    proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
"i have smoked pot. it is a stupid business, like masturbation."
                                                     -- thomas pynchon

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)

Reply to: