Re: Do we want to Require or Recommend DH
Thorsten Glaser writes ("Re: Do we want to Require or Recommend DH"):
> No. A maintainer normally deals with their own packages, or with
> .dsc and debdiff, for NMU. (This is also an answer to the reply
> from wrar. Oh, jonas also said so, reloading the list index page.)
"Maintainer" is precisely the hat we wear when working on our own
packages. But working with Debian is much more than just working on
our own packages.
There is QA work on the many packages with no specific maintainer;
there are cross-archive campaigns such as reproducible builds,
architecture support, init system diversity, i18n/l10n, and so on.
There is RC bugfixing etc. to try to make a release. There is
security support, stable release management, and backports.
And of course as users and downstreams we wish to exercise our
software freedom: ie to modify the programs that run on our computer.
That freedom being the point of Debian.
For all these tasks, we often need to interact with or modify the
package's build machinery (to varying extent). That means learning
the build machinery of every package we work on - at least well enough
to accomplish the task at hand.
> Is 'the Debian of today' the *Debian* of today, or just a couple of
> very involved people?
Well, Sam posed a consultation here on debian-devel. My assessment of
the rough consensus of the discussion here is very similar to Sam's.
Do you agree with Sam's assessment of the apparent consensus on this
list ?
If not, how do you think the question you pose should be answered ?
Since it is a question of tradeoffs, with no definite right or wrong
answer, perhaps we should hold a GR ? What do you think the result of
such a GR would be ?
I think such a GR would be a collosal waste of time. This issue is
not important enough. In particular, because the consensus is *not*
that you will *have to* change your packages. What this discussion
has mostly concluded is that we should issue a *recommendation*.
*Not* a mandate.
You may be gently encouraged to change your packages. In practice if
you refuse, it is not likely that anyone will want to fight you over
it. You will probably be able to leave the bug open "wontfix", if
there is a bug at all, indefinitely.
> I doubt those very involved people, with hundreds of packages in their
> DDPO already (don't laugh, I saw that), could shoulder the burden, were
> those others to leave disgruntled by things being forced onto them.
So, nothing will be forced onto you and you do not need to fight this.
But I would like you to consider this: the primary responsibility of
the maintainer of a Debian package is a *management* responsibility.
Our job as maintainer is not to do all the work. If we like to do the
work ourselves, great. If we don't and the work goes undone, well,
c'est la vie; maybe someone else will have the energy.
But our one un-shirkable responsibility is that of creating an
environment where *others* can contribute.
Ian.
--
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
Reply to: