Re: Lintian ERROR saying dpatch is obsolete
Michael Gilbert <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> If someone else is willing to be the maintainer of the tool (as is the
>> case here), I think it's a bit more complicated than that.
> That isn't quite the case. The existing maintainer isn't stepping down,
> he's consciously deprecating the tool (and will continue to maintain it
> for years until the deprecation process is complete).
Yes, I know. But that doesn't *intrinsically* mean that he's correct to
do so. If, for example, Joey decided that debhelper was a bad idea and
everyone should switch to CDBS, I'm sure we'd all listen closely to the
reasoning, but I don't think his opinion would automatically win. :)
> Anyway, from what I've seen in the past the utmost deference is always
> been given to maintainers. If one wants to second-guess maintainer
> decisions, they need to appeal to the tech committee.
Invoking governance processes in volunteer organizations full of
opinionated people is inherently painful, and hence is the option to use
only when every other course of action is even more painful. I think a
general project discussion about the future of dpatch is more useful than
a technical committee discussion of same.
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>