Re: Bug#701536: RM: subsurface -- RoQA; unmaintained package, maintainer MIA
- To: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Cc: Khalid El Fathi <email@example.com>, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Ansgar Burchardt <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org, Sylvestre Ledru <email@example.com>, Robert Wolfe <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Dmitrijs Ledkovs <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
- Subject: Re: Bug#701536: RM: subsurface -- RoQA; unmaintained package, maintainer MIA
- From: Dirk Hohndel <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sun, 03 Mar 2013 15:37:12 -0800 (PST)
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20130303153712.74248.FMU31909@air.gr8dns.org>
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 5133ABAA.email@example.com>
- References: <[🔎] 20130303120604.GA18525@physik.fu-berlin.de> <[🔎] alpine.DEB.firstname.lastname@example.org> <[🔎] F2C5E82B-6AAC-402B-A557-801174A01B75@elfathi.fr> <[🔎] 20130303113324.466293.FMU31909@air.gr8dns.org> <[🔎] 5133A663.email@example.com> <[🔎] 20130303115109.883220.FMU31909@air.gr8dns.org> <[🔎] 5133ABAA.firstname.lastname@example.org>
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <email@example.com> writes:
> The license issue was just an example (hence the braces). The reasoning
> is that the Debian packaging is supposed to be independent of upstream,
> especially since we cannot always follow upstream, during a freeze, for
That makes sense.
> Assume we have version 3.0 in Debian and upstream has 3.5 and we're
> frozen. During the freeze, someone discovers a nasty bug in subsurface
> which is considered RC (release critical) in Debian, but gets fixed in
> 3.5.1 upstream.
> Now, since we'd be in freeze, uploading the new version 3.5.1 into
> unstable to fix the problem in testing would not be possible. Instead,
> the fix would have to be backported to 3.0 and fixed in the Debian
> packaging. If the Debian packaging would be part of upstream,
> backporting the bug would be a bit difficult since the fix would be
> realized as a patch in the debian/patches directory which wouldn't apply
> if upstream was already at 3.5.1 (which includes the fix naturally) and
> the official Debian packaging (which is at 3.0) would be part of the
> upstream repository.
> I am aware that you could probably avoid this problem with branches, but
> I think it would just make things difficult. Debian cannot simply be
> up-to-date with upstream and thus upstream shouldn't maintain the
> Debian-specific part.
Yes, all this could be worked around but it creates a dependency of
Debian on upstream and that's not desired. No problem.
>>> A great place for maintaining the packaging for Debian is github, for
>> Well - I run my own git server at git.hohndel.org but we can use
>> whatever works for the packaging.
> Sure, that was just a suggestion. I'd just keep it independent from
OK, no problem.