Re: Bug#333858: Proposed improved patch for yaird
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 07:54:38AM +0200, Erik van Konijnenburg wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 09:57:49AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 23:57:59 +0200 Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 16, 2005 at 10:35:45PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > > > But please wait doing too much about that. I'd like to have it setup
> > > > differently - or at least discuss having setup differently.
> > ^^^^^^^
>
> > Erik: I see 3 sane scenarios tied to using Alioth SVN:
> >
> > 1) You join the Debian-kernel team and we maintain upstream yaird and
> > debian subdir together. Every upstream release - even if only related
> > to the redhat - is also a Debian release.
> >
> > 2) You join the Debian-kernel team and we maintain upstream yaird and
> > debian subdir separately within the project. Upstream releases and
> > Debian releases are separate.
> >
> > 3) You join the Debian-kernel team if you want to work directly on the
> > debian subdir of yaird - or coordinate with us as now and concentrate
> > on the code itself - maintained as a separate Alioth project or
> > elsewere.
> >
> > 4) Yaird is setup as a separate Alioth project - either all of it (as
> > in 1 or 2) or only the debian subdir (as in 3).
> >
> >
> > One reason for 3 or 4 is the amount of "noise" if you are not
> > interested in what else goes on regarding kernel maintainance in
> > Debian. If you are in for some information overload, I suggest 2 - and
> > hope that in addition to more convenient maintainence of yaird compared
> > to now (which is somewhat clunky, as we've both agreed on) you also
> > gain interest in the other work here and apply you insight and hacker
> > skills for the benefit of Debian and the world :-)
>
> Thanks for the lucid overview; after going through it, I think something
> close to option 3 would be most effective:
>
> Having separate trees for the yaird core and the debian subdir sounds like
> a good idea to me: it underlines the goal that yaird should be written
> portable enough to function in other distros. That portability helps
> to find bugs quicker in practise: the ldd problems for instance showed up
> in Fedora before they did in Debian.
Notice that doing 3) like you say doesn't preclude using the kernel svn repo,
it is just an organisation thingy, but this is upto you.
> As regards the yaird core, I'd prefer maintaining it as a project separate
> from debian-kernel, with separate mailing lists. Motivation: at the moment
> I'm subscribed to debian-kernel, and the overload is impressive: it's too
> easy to spend all free time catching up on mail, leaving no time to build
> new stuff. Also, it's good to be able to allow people to maintain the
> yaird core without having to grant them write access to the kernel SVN.
Because you use the kernel SVN repo doesn't mean you don't get to use your own
mailing list :) Altough i am not sure if we could decouple the svn CIA irc bot
and email notifications for a sub-project.
> Where should yaird core be hosted? It's not pure Debian, but could be
> hosted on Alioth under SVN, provided a DD sponsors it. Hosting the core
> on Alioth can only help effective coordination between core and subdir,
> so I would prefer Alioth hosting over other sites.
Non-DDs can perfectly well create and head alioth projects.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: