Hi, On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 04:13:09PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Sun, 11 Nov 2007, Michael Hanke wrote: <snip> >> I like the idea, but it would only help solving the problem, if there >> are actually some DDs reading it and acting accordingly. > > Sure. The sentinel we are building for Debian-Med relevant packages > is infact meant to be read by Debian-Med interested developers - that's > the reason we are developing it. ;-) > This is the explanation why I posted it on Debian-Med because we are > focussing on a subset of packages to pick out the relevant packages > from mentors. A posting on debian-devel would have been apropriate > if I would have had a suggestion to make an enhancement for general > enhancing handling packages on mentors - which I just have no idea about. I totally agree. I just wanted to point to the constant shortage of DDs involved in Debian-med. And because you posted it to debian-devel I thought it might be useful to mention this as a place to get involved... <snip> >> In general I think that packages should not be uploaded without a formal >> request. Some people (including me) use mentors.d.n. to provide >> unfinished packages for sponsors and beta-tester. Having such a package >> uploaded could introduce unecessary, because already known, bugs to >> Debian unstable. > > Yes, this is exactly the reason why I did not even downloaded your package > from mentors - because I expect you to have a sponsor if you don't ask > explicitely for sponsoring. The problem is, that I have no chance to > *verify* that there is a sponsor working on this. That's why my idea > was to list the sponsor in addition to the maintainer in the task > file to enable others to ping the sponsor if needed. The mentors interface provides a way to mark packages as 'looking for sponsors' and there is also sponsors.debian.net. It is however the sponsorees task to advertise the packages appropriately. >>> BTW, Michael, what do you think about pushing your packaging stuff >>> of nifticlib into our Debian-Med SVN? >> We switched to Git some time ago and all my packages are available from >> git.debian.org. The control files should list the corresponding >> repository. If one package is not there (yet), it is because no >> upload/update was necessary since I started moving. The next upload will >> make the package repository available as well. > > I admit that I have the strange feeling that the pure existence of several > different repository management systems makes the world a worse place than > the existance of different editors (emacs/vim/...) or desktop environments > (Gnome/KDE/...). The later ones are pure personal decisions but different > repository systems that are intended to let different people work together > fail in doing so because different people tend to have different habits. > So even if I would adopt your preference of git over say svn and would move > my packages to git other DDs prefere something else and we will finally > not be able to have a common repository of the Debian-Med stuff for > instance. I admit this is really disgusting. ;-) Yeah, in an ideal world we would all use the same tools. But back in real life I use the tools that are the most compatible with _me_ and that _I_ am the most productive with. Having a sponsor that shares my views on the choice of weapons puts _me_ in the position to work productively. IMHO if ones relies on the ressources that debian-med provides (tools, sponsors, feedback) then one should be as compatible with debian-med as possible. In my case however, I already have a working environment that lets me contribute to debian-med without depending on its ressources. So as long as the work is done right there should be no problem. If however someone stopped doing so, debian-med should hijack the packages an put them in its SVN. Of course, always given the fact that it has enough manpower to do so. >> Because I use Git + git-buildpackage and a repository layout different >> from the debian-med SVN I don't want to push things to it. But given the >> distributed nature of Git, it should be equally easy to get the package >> sources and provide patches for it. > > Well, the idea was to form a group maintaining Debian-Med relevant stuff > in one repositore. This does not mean I would try to convince you to > drop git and switch to svn. This is rather a cry for help to find a > way to easily enable every interested person easily to cope with changes > in packaging stuff od Debian-Med packages. David has written a great > tool that lists SVN commits: > http://debian-med.alioth.debian.org/ > but all changes outside SVN slip through this. Do you see any chance > to cover "everybody pet repository" which this kind of tool? I know the new face of debian-med on alioth and like it, because it provides one with an idea about the dynamics of the project. Which is much better than the old webpages and also the wiki (although somewhat orthogonal to them). I'd be glad if the relevant Git repositories on alioth would be listed there as well. As David pointed out in another message this might be possible. Personally I don't feel like you about 'the single repository', but only from the technical perspective, because it might limit some people that lack the required capabilities or simply have different preferences (which doesn't mean that they cannot achieve optimal results in their very own way). The general notion of a centralized gateway to _all_ debian-med related code in Debian is definitely an advantage. Cheers, Michael -- GPG key: 1024D/3144BE0F Michael Hanke http://apsy.gse.uni-magdeburg.de/hanke ICQ: 48230050
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature