On Wed, 2022-06-01 at 14:11 +0200, Paride Legovini wrote: > > Hi Kernel Team, > > > > I'm the maintainer of iw, which currently has me as the only Maintainer, > > and packaging is hosted under debian/ on salsa. I think it would be > > better to have the package maintained by the kernel team (with me as an > > Uploader), and hosted under kernel-team/ on salsa. > > > > To be clear: I want to keep maintaining the package, but given that it's > > widely used I think it's better to allow non-NMU uploads from a relevant > > team (iw upstream is on kernel.org). > > > > The feedback I've got on IRC is positive, but I'd like to get a +1 on > > the mailing list, so there's a record of the decision. Are you happy > > with the move? If the answer is positive I'll request salsa access, open > > a salsa ticket to move the project and update d/control. > > > > (This case is almost identical to what happened with iproute2 [1].) > > > > Thanks, > > > > Paride > > > > [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-kernel/2022/04/msg00002.html > > Hi again, > > I just noticed that iw 5.19 is out and I'd like to package it. Looks > like a good occasion to move the repo under the kernel team. > > I'm totally fine with a NACK, but it would be a pity to skip what I > believe is an improvement because my previous email drowned in > automated > mail, which I have the impression is what happened. > > Cc: Ben Hutchings, as he gave a +1 to the iproute2 proposal [1]. I'd be happy to accept iw into team maintenance, if there are no objections. Our package repositories generally have CI enabled, so I've just opened a merge request to do that for iw. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Humour is the best antidote to reality.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part