Re: finally end single-person maintainership

[Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu>]

Hi Wouter,

Am Sun, Apr 07, 2024 at 03:31:43PM +0200 schrieb Wouter Verhelst:
> [Feel free to quote any part of this email which I wrote outside of this
> mailinglist]

OK, moving the discussion to debian-devel where it should belong.

> Debian packages need to be well maintained. In some cases, having
> multiple maintainers on a package improves the resulting quality of
> packages. But in some other cases, it does not; one example for this
> second case is my package "logtool", which I'm going to upload to fix
> #1066251 soon and for which by the simple act of doing that I will
> double the amount of uploads it's seen in the past five years (and the
> number of uploads in the past 10 can still be counted on the fingers of
> a single hand).
> 
> This is not because it's not well maintained; it's because the package
> just *does not require* a lot of work to be kept up to date: upstream
> has not been active for over 20 years, but it still performs the job it
> was designed to do, as it was designed to, and I see no need to have it
> removed from the archive.

What is your opinion about pushing logtool to Salsa?
 
> A second good example is my package "nbd".

Which is maintained on Salsa which I personally consider nice.

> Similarly, the fact that a package has a "team" listed as its maintainer
> not in any wayimply that the team has more than zero members.

ACK,

> If there are stupid barriers to helping people out by doing NMUs or
> taking over packages, then by all means let's break down those barriers.

I was sometimes confronted with those barriers.

> But let's not try to "fix" a problem by introducing a rule that is, at
> best, affecting something only very weakly related to the problem that
> we are trying to solve.

I would be happy to talk about rules that might help solving problems
(as well as droping rules that are creating barriers).

Kind regards
   Andreas.

-- 
https://fam-tille.de