On Tue, 2016-12-13 at 20:55 +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote: [...] > Thanks for providing this feedback > > I've done the following: > - forked the upstream repository The existing packaging repos are also based on the upstream git repo. > - created a debian/sid branch > - copied debian/* from jessie into that branch and committed > - copied debian/* from sid into that branch and committed > - used "git format-patch" and "git am" to copy in changes from your repo > - merged upstream's 1.3.4 tag into debian/sid > - updated patches (many could be dropped) > - other small updates (home page, VCS fields) > - pushed my repo into a new location, collab-maint/nfs-utils This throws away all the packaging history, which I don't think is a good idea. > Please have a look at my repository structure and tell me if you feel it > is useful for this project. If not, my changes could be extracted > easily enough with git format-patch and applied into your repository > with git am and then we could start the collab-maint/nfs-utils > repository over again. > > Are you happy for this to live in collab-maint now? Maybe that will > encourage more collaborators. I've added a README.source inviting > contributions too. I'm happy for nfs-utils to move away from the kernel team, and that implies it should go in a different project on Alioth. I've never been very comfortable with collab-maint and I don't see the value in allowing everyone to push to a git repository (versus sending a pull request). However, as I'm not going to be maintaining it any more I don't claim a right to veto that. I think you should check whether Anibal and Steve want to continue being co-maintainers for nfs-utils and if so what their opinions are. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings The two most common things in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part