Re: Moving iw under the kernel team
Ben Hutchings wrote on 02/06/2022:
> 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.
Thanks Ben. As nobody objected in about one week I filed a salsa support
ticket requesting a repository move:
https://salsa.debian.org/salsa/support/-/issues/300
The next iw upload will have the Kernel Team as Maintainer and me as
Uploader.
> Our package repositories generally have CI enabled, so I've just opened
> a merge request to do that for iw.
It's merged and working fine, thanks.
Paride
Reply to: