Hi, sorry, I have a hard time to follow what is happening here and what, if any, problems exist. Am Mittwoch, den 31.07.2013, 06:34 +0100 schrieb Philip Hands: > Having just had a very frustrating conversation about this ITP with > Jonas, it seems that he has only a passing familiarity with Haskell, did > not bother to request packaging by the Debian Haskell Group (which to me > as an outsider seems to be the natural home for such a package), and > imagined that he was a member of DHG when he in fact is not (which seems > bizarre, and a little worrying). I always have considered Jonas to be at least somewhat part of the Haskell group, by virtue of being the maintainer of pandoc, both a popular tool and an important Haskell library (judging from its position in the dependency graph). But indeed I don’t see him listed as a member of the pkg-haskell team; maybe we just did not talk about this enough. Jonas: How would you want your relation to the Haskell Group to be? Generelly, we (the DHG) would like to keep maintainer all Haskell packages, as a lot of talks involve _all_ Haskell libraries in the archive; coordination between different maintainers, and possibly even different packaging styles and releasing processes, would add a lot of unnecessary friction. So indeed someone should just tell us about the RFP (and how urgent it is) and we will react accordingly, as we have done in the past. > On the other hand, he claims that it was always his intent to have the > package team-maintained, Great, looks like things are in order. From first glance it seems that swish is non-trivial as it is both an executable, but also a library that is meant to be used by end-users (similar to xmonad and yi). Who of you now wants swish in Debian and can tell me more about how it ought to be presented to the user? > I would also suggest that ftpmasters reject any haskell package uploaded > by Jonas, at least until he bothers to have a reasonable discussion > about the best way to proceed on the debian-haskell list. Sounds harsh; were you two at loggerheads? I could not find traces of your discussions, but generally I know that both of you can have reasonable discussions. Greetings, Joachim PS: d-haskell@l.d.o is the right address to discuss things with the DHG; pkg-haskell-maintainers is mainly used for automated mails, such as from dak and britney. -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part