Re: We have a problem
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 05/06/2015 06:49 PM, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
>> I grepped for your name in the changelogs of soundmodem
>
>
> The soundmodem activity predates the user space package. Sorry for
> the confusion. Back when soundmodem was part of the kernel
> sources, there were tools packaged for userspace management of the
> soundmodem. This would be back in 1999-2001 time frame.
Then I don't see how you can claim to be a maintainer of the userspace
package, those were different packages then.
>> Where is he saying that? He didn't change the Homepage field in
>> debian/control, did he?
>
>
> He actually filed bug 781206 against soundmodem claiming:
>
> "soundmodem's upstream maintainer is no longer maintaining the
> package"
But he didn't change the package in that regard, so I don't see the
problem.
>> One of the other hallmarks is also to not trying to bad-mouth
>> other DMs and DDs and the fact that you CC'ed Sylvestre with your
>> email when Sylvestre is Iain AM is much worse than making such
>> mistakes that you accuse Iain of.
>
>
> Actually CCing the AM is something that should be done when there
> is praise for or concern about a prospective maintainer's actions.
But as you can see, even his AM disagrees with you.
> The "all" we are talking about were people who were interested in
> maintaining the ham radio packages and never amounted to more than
> 8 people. The ideal was to show who was a member of the hamradio
> maintainers group if I recall correctly.
Then why exactly would the control file have Maintainer field which
includes all hamradio people through the list _and_ an Uploaders field
with, according to you, the list of all people in the hamradio group.
That doesn't make any sense, does it? If you're on the list, you are
receiving all mails (bugs reports, FTP mails etc) regarding the
packages, so I don't really see your point.
> Not my original ideal - I didn't create the group. Again, the idea
> was not to include every developer, but those who were working on
> the ham tools. FWIW, it has worked ok up until the last year or 2.
> I don't recall any major problems with ham developers duplicating
> work or having conflicting changes.
Yeah, it's still wrong. As I explained before.
>>> So you are now judge, jury and executioner with the power to
>>> declare Debian Developers retired from the project? It is such
>>> a relief to know you have the gift of reading people's hearts
>>> and minds without consulting them.
>
>> Dude, calm down. He didn't kick you out of Debian. He,
>> rightfully, removed you from the list of Uploaders because, you
>> know, you weren't uploading.
>
>
> I am calm. This was not an instance of an unmaintained package.
> It was a package that had not changed much upstream for the last
> couple of years until the last week or so. He did not even have
> the common decency to ask the hamradio maintainers list.
Ask regarding what? Regarding the new upstream version?
> He was also fully aware I was devoting more time for Debian. He
> willfully chose to not ask or even drop a note to the list that he
> wanted to/was removing uploaders.
>
> It is not the first time he has taken unilateral action concerning
> ham radio packages, and other people have expressed concerns to me
> in private about this.
Then these people should post to the debian-hams mailing list because,
as you can see, everyone else so far on this list disagrees with you.
You are free to forward these particular messages to me in private.
>>> I am more than a little concerned that you haven't completed
>>> the NM process and are able to upload packages....
>
>> What the hell is this supposed to mean? Are you actually reading
>> what you are saying here? You are philosophizing on how we should
>> treat each other in Debian but then you are writing sentences
>> like these.
>
>
> That means we have someone, I am sure with good intentions, who has
> not completed the Debian process for becoming a maintainer or
> developer. He has been given root access to every machine that
> runs Debian.
Uhm, he has only permissions to upload the packages that he has been
given permission to. Claiming that he would get root access running
Debian if he gets dm-allow for soundmodem is a bit stretched, don't
you think?
> His demonstrated penchant to run ahead with changes to existing
> packages without consulting the maintainer group makes me a little
> nervous that he just might change something over zealously, without
> considering all the circumstances, that may cause unintentional
> difficulties for the users of the affected packages.
You're being paranoid, I'm sorry. He did absolutely nothing that would
any reasonable person come to this conclusion.
Adrian
- --
.''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' : Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
`- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2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=+5P/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: