On വെള്ളി 06 ജനുവരി 2017 02:46 വൈകു, Philip Hands wrote: > Hi Praveen, > > I assume that all these ITPs are prompted by your crowd-funding effort. You assumption is wrong. It is better to ask than assume. If it were part of the crowd funding campaign, I'd have updated the -devel thread. The initial crowd funding target was gulp and webpack. gulp is completed and we are skipping webpack for now because the target was not achived and also hoping rollup can be used instead. > Today we have #850399 which plumbs new depths in that it has had both > long and short descriptions trimmed from the body of the message. > > Please would you take responsibility for your packaging team by > instructing them that it is simply unacceptable to have these packages > with such useless descriptions. I have told them to try and write good descriptions. > The fact that they all seem to be trimming off the FIX_ME that npm2deb > includes for them, and are thus also removing the explanation of what > Node.js is, seems like vandalism to me. Did you tell them to do that, > or are they learning that from one another? I told them to write good descriptions, but its hard to write when README/upstream documentation is missing any description. > TBH I find this whole approach rather worrying. We have different severity levels for bugs for a reason. It is unsustainable to treat every bug as rc. If someone offers to help with better descriptions we will happily add them. TBH it is even hard for me to write more descriptions. I don't think it is meaningful to fill the descriptions with something for the sake for the sake of it. > Are you paying these people for their efforts? No. This is part of the workshop organized by a college (College of Engineering Pune). Only interested students turned up for the workshop. This was a follow up event of the mini debconf we organized in the same college (http://in2016.mini.debconf.org/). The college is paying me to take the workshop. We (I and Prof Abhijit who is organizing this workshop) offered a Free Software development elective earlier in 2012 and it is continuing this year as well. Since this was a local event, I posted only in debian-dug-in list and #debian-in irc channel. https://lists.debian.org/debian-dug-in/2016/12/msg00001.html > Are we supposed to expect them to remain interested in these packages > when the money dries up? > > If not, what is the plan for providing maintenance for these packages > for the time that they are going to be in stable? You can see more discussion on pkg-javascript team mailing list on this topic http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-javascript-devel/2017-January/017217.html All these packages are required for packaging ava, which is required to run tests of many other node libraries we packaged for getting grunt and gulp in debian. https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Nodejs/Tasks/ava It is my intention to maintain these build tools in debian, since this is a huge task, I'm eager to find more people join that effort and I hope to find more people to help me in this effort through workshops like these. > Cheers, Phil. > > P.S. While you're at it, I would suggest that you encourage your > packaging team to contact the upstreams in order to discover whether > they are happy for their current release to be preserved in Debian > stable -- I can imagine that some of them might be unhappy with the > prospect of having the latest release packaged, if there are bug fixes > in the HEAD that they don't want bug reports about for the next 5 years. > They could then push out a release quickly and you could package that > instead. > There is much choice we have here as I was forced to package these. I'd have happily maintained diaspora if an exception was granted for ruby-handlebars-assets. You cannot ask people to do mutually exclusive things.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature