Re: Git Packaging Round 2: SHOULD Not or MUSt NOT Github
Hi,
On 15/9/19 3:31 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 9/14/19 6:59 AM, Balasankar "Balu" C wrote:
>> But it shouldn't matter to the project that I do my packaging work in
>> GitLab.com or GitHub.com because as far as Debian is concerned, as long
>> as others can contribute without having an account in that service - I
>> should not be forbidden using them. That is, if I come in and say "I
>> won't accept any patches submitted over BTS, but only GitHub PRs", the
>> project has every right to kick the package out of Debian or fork it.
>> But as long as I continue supporting people using BTS, I should be fine
>> using whatever I want as my primary platform.
>
> Could you explain why you'd have VCS fields then, if not to advertise
> what the addres of your Git? Isn't this an invitation to use the
> platform you're pointing at, as a mean to modify your package?
My understanding is that it is an additional avenue for people to get
more details about a package, how it is managed, and/or to contribute to
the work. It does not automatically override BTS as a place to file
issues or contribute patches to. That is still there.
>
>> So will the GR be
>> "You must not do any sort of contribution to Debian using non-free
>> software/hardware"
>>
>> or
>>
>> "You can use anything you want to contribute to Debian, but there should
>> be a way for other people to contribute to your work in Debian without
>> compromising on their freedom" ? (This translates to my words in the
>> beginning of this reply - patches over BTS must not be rejected by a
>> maintainer)
>
> Of course, the later. I don't care if a contributor is using Debian in a
> VM running on Windows, as long as he/she doesn't force me to do the
> same. That's the same spirit with using a non-free Git platform.
Thanks for clarifying - from reading your initial mail what I understood
was that you meant the former. I stand corrected in my understanding.
>
> It is a real life experience that I had to touch horribly maintained
> packages by unknown contributors, with Vcs-Git:
> https://github.com/<foo>/<bar>, missing commits not matching the
> archive, and no response from the maintainer to the BTS (even for RC
> bugs).
Isn't this why we have an NMU process (for the package and an MIA
process for the maintainer). Personally, I consider Debian archive and
BTS as the single source of truth for any package in Debian - yet.
Regards
Balu
Reply to: