Re: Improving our response to "duplicate" packages in Debian
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 09:24:25AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 28 juin 2012 à 16:42 +0200, Guus Sliepen a écrit :
> > - Don't immediately start complaining to the submitter of the ITP. Just let
> > the submitter devote his/her energy to packaging.
> I don’t think it is worthwile to let people devote their energy to
> packaging pet applications that will disappear in 2 years time when they
> find another one.
I think this is approaching the problem from the wrong end. Instead of
preserving the status quo and asking oracles to predict the future we
should have better means of _removing_ software that has proven to be
inferior of an equivalent alternative in Debian. The advantage is that
we have objective criteria to be able to make an informed decision --
not a guess based on heuristics and opinion. The disadvantage is that it
imposes work on other volunteers -- but see below...
> We really need to find better ways to involve new users in core teams,
> and that means removing from our collective consciousness the idea that
> you come in Debian to package your new favorite piece of software.
I have to disagree -- and I would even make the bold claim that
"packaging your favorite piece of software" is a very common (if not the
most common) entry point for _people_ into Debian. One could see the
"pet projects" as the price we need to pay to make participation in
Debian very attractive (not even talking about the role that "pet
projects" play in the context of perceived universality of Debian) .
Getting people to participate in Debian, make them become confident and
experienced is IMHO a requirement for increasing the chance of anyone
joining core teams.
If it would work otherwise, we could just post a job-ad on LinkedIn:
"Debian security team is looking for skilled developers".