On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 11:08 AM Arnaud Ferraris wrote: Hello Arnaud, Thanks for bringing this forward. > Most of the Mobian developers are also members of the DebianOnMobile > team[3], and we hope to contribute even more to Debian now that > bullseye > is being released. In order to achieve this goal, we plan on bringing > packages from the above items #4 and #5 to the Debian archive > (preferably in the 'main' area), and are considering several ways of > doing so: A question on those different options: do you see them as mutually exclusive or could we go for a combination of them? Examples: - I do not see how option b. would conflict with a. or c. - Option c: when you wrote "merge all of the above", I assume that an intermediary approach, similar to the point a option 2 could also be envisaged. > a. merge all device-specific metapackages and tweaks into a single > (or maybe 2) source package, making it easier to maintain and > improve > * option 1: have a single binary package per device, replacing both > the current $device-support and mobian-$device-tweaks > * option 2: keep generating separate metapackages and > customizations, > as we currently do in Mobian > > [...] > > b. add Mobian generic customizations (initramfs scripts and hooks, > systemd config files, among other things) to the source package > holding all device-specific tweaks > > [...] > > c. merge all of the above into the existing "mobile-tweaks" source > package [6] > > As DebianOnMobile maintainers, we agreed a while ago that mobile- > tweaks > would mostly hold cosmetic tweaks, and not be used to significantly > alter the system behavior. Almost a year down the road, do we want to > keep it that way? Or can we drop all mobian-$device-tweaks packages > and > add features to the existing $device-tweaks ones? > > FYI, this question was raised when I filed an ITP for mobian- > tweaks[7], > although my answer would probably be different today. Personnaly, I would prefer we avoid this split of tweaks settings between 2 different binary packages (ie: mobian-$device-tweaks and $device-tweaks). Whether that be mobian-$device-tweaks or mobile- tweaks, I have no preference. I see some overlap between both packages, in term of purpose, which can lead to effort duplication, which we should avoid IMO. I think we should challenge this split of the device tweaks (and the common one too): let's take the UCM2 profile example, this is not a cosmetic change and therefore belong to mobian-tweaks packages (according to the current agreement). IMHO, it would be fine to have this in a single tweak package (mobile-tweaks or mobian-$device-tweaks) - this is device specific anyway, the package description is making that clear, and could be removed later on while upstream'ed properly (then it should become part of alsa-ucm-conf for this specific example). Are there use cases I am missing here where we see a strong need for device specific tweaks split in 2 different packages? Also, the 3 options are very much focused on the packaging work, I'd like to ask: what about the team themselves? Eventually, if we want to bring Mobian closer to Debian, does it make sense to keep 2 different salsa teams (Mobian-team and DebianOnMobile-team). As you said, there's some overlap in term of membership and I believe our objectives are aligned. Merging would only be benefical imho: clarity for new contributors, reduced risk of work duplication, improved communications - there are currently several communication channels where team devs can talk, but not a single channel where dev related discussions are being held and reaching everyone involved. IMHO - we should also consider the team aspect if we want to bring Mobian closer to Debian: that is an important dimension with its own set of potential improvements :-) Best regards, Henry-Nicolas Tourneur
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part