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

Re: Let's start salvaging packages -- Summary of the BoF Session.



On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 02:47:58PM +0000, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> 
> 
> On August 5, 2018 2:17:04 PM UTC, Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> wrote:
> >On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 01:20:47PM +0000, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >> Package 'salvaging' is about an involuntary change of maintainer
> >involving
> >> someone who is sufficiently active in the project not to be MIA. 
> >It's
> >> fundamentally different.
> >> 
> >> I suspect it's constitutionally sufficient for the TC to approve the
> >> salvaging process as long as the process allows them to resolve
> >related
> >> disputes.
> >
> >But there is _no_ dispute.  All the maintainer has to do is to close
> >the ITS
> >bug within a month.  Thus, if the bug remains unanswered, there is no
> >one
> >who would want to dispute the bug.  And not even a temporary
> >incapacitation
> >is a problem: for an ITS to be filed, you'd need to neglect the package
> >quite a while, thus the package was effectively unmaintained for much
> >longer
> >than a month.
> >
> >Involving the TC is a heavyweight process, and is fit for when there's
> >an
> >actual disagreement.  A disagreement requires two parties, with ITS one
> >of
> >them is gone.
> 
> So a maintainer misses one email and anything goes?  

No, they needs to miss >2 mails, but in reality more:
- Before the package becomes eligble, it'd have bugs reported against
  it.
- The ITS bug
- The NMUdiff.

(And even then, just talk wich each other; but this is a gerneal life
thing, not really related only to this process here).

> I have packages that look somewhat unmaintained that aren't.  I may
> seem somewhat oversensitive on this, but I recently discovered a
> 'maybe we should remove this package' bug on one of my packages that
> I'd missed the mail when it came in.

> TC is also supposed to set technical policy (including "contents of
> ... developers' reference materials").  I agree that invoking the TC
> for each salvaging decision is heavyweight, likely excessively so, but
> that isn't what I am suggesting.  I'm suggesting that they review and
> approve the salvaging POLICY (once and done, assuming they approve).

David Bremner co-authored the process. Gunnar was present in
the BoF. So, yes, TC members are already (informally) involved in this.

-- 
tobi

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: