Louis-Philippe Véronneau <pollo@debian.org> wrote on 20/09/2024 at 17:32:59+0200: > On 2024-09-20 11:09, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote: >> Louis-Philippe Véronneau <pollo@debian.org> wrote on 20/09/2024 at 16:38:36+0200: >> >>> I opened an RT ticket (#9599) asking for the creation of the VM on >>> September 1st and followed up on September 11th, and never got a >>> reply. >>> >>> I'm not subscribed to debian-devel, but I'd like it a lot if we could >>> continue this discussion on the ticket itself, as that seems to be the >>> place where things should be done. >>> >>> FWIW, I'm happy to administer the service and if Otto also signs up >>> for this with me, we would be two DDs. >>> >>> I think Nicolas has done great job working on this and I've proved I >>> was motivated in helping fixing things in Lintian in the long run. >>> >>> Cheers, >> I think the mail you just replied to is explicit. What do you need >> me to >> clarify? >> Bests, >> > > Thank you for the work you and all the people in DSA do. > > I understand from that mail that you are willing, if no one else in > DSA objects, to open a VM for us. I'm very glad this is the case and > I'm sure Otto will be happy to join me as co-maintainer of the > service. > > As I said, I was mostly surprised to see a follow up on this mailing > list instead of on the RT ticket I opened. Well, I can adopt the ticket if that makes you more comfortable, but I thought that the public reply would be better. :) > As far as I understand, that is the right place to ask for such a > thing and I was expecting communication to be done there. If it's not, > I'm happy to reach out in some other way. It's a good place to ask, but as the thread was going in parallel, I prefer to give a public reply rather than just replying to you and leave you the job of informing interested parties about the upcoming plan. > More generally (and that's not directly towards you at all), I > understand the behavior of some previous Lintian maintainers ruffled a > bunch of feathers and people are rightfully distrustful. In DSA's case, the problem was the impossibility to work towards a reasonable consensus with some previous maintainers of the project. We have limited time and resources, deploying nifty cutting-edge solutions may seem good from a Developer PoV and we acknowledge this will, but we can't necessarily commit to support and help people to achive this level of "moderness" when half the deps are neither packaged nor stable, let-alone the security concerns one might have. In your very case, a static-backed website creates little to no concern and therefore I don't see any reason to say no. > I'm not asking for a blank state, but I hope the Debian community will > be understanding and open to the work currently being done trying to > fix those issues, even if/when honest mistakes are made. Don't bother too much, things will always end settling. > Problems with Lintian won't be solved tomorrow or next week, but if > Axel, Bastien and I continue working together toward our goals, I'm > sure Lintian will eventually regain that lost trust. I don't believe lintian lost trust. Some might have issues with projects, but I tend to tie trustfulness with people, not projects. Bests, -- PEB
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature