Re: Work-needing packages report for Jul 11, 2003
On Sun, Jul 13, 2003 at 12:55:48PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> But IMHO it does make sense to have NMs to prove that they are able
> to improve the existing Debian system
Sure, but there's plently of ways of doing that:
* Fixing bugs (any bug, not just RC)
* Writing documentation
* Working on specific subprojects
* Maintaining packages
* Doing security audits
* Providing intelligent and useful commentary on the mailing lists,
instead of the bile-loaded, insulting or time-wasting trite some
existing DDs spout
> not only to make it grow by adding new packages; otherwise, the whole
> distribution would get worse and worse over time.
Ours is volunteer work with just a handful of exceptions. Volunteer
work lives on motivation. If you tell new people that they _have_ to
adopt something from the WNPP list in order to "get in" that's not
going to give us a better distribution. IMO if there are packages that
existing developers don't care about, instead of shoving the packages
in the NM's general direction, the best way to fulfill our contract
with our users is to kick the packages out and not give them the
illusion that these are being actively maintained (when I do "apt-get
install foo" I have that expectation about foo). The only thing that's
needed now is a flam^Wsane discussion about the definition of "not to
> Any comments?
Other than "we obviously agree with each other"? :-)
> (BTW: I'm an also an applicant, thus had to do the same).
"The same" meaning ... ?