Re: [Pkg-octave-devel] Plans for Wheezy++
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 10:26:03AM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> As far as I’m concerned, I prefer to wait for the resolution of #706761
> before uploading to unstable. Please contribute to the discussion if you
> have something to add there.
Hmm, so we now have two proposals on the table; we do not care which
one of them is chosen, but one of them would be good :)
> I plan starting to upload to unstable once this is settled out,
> beginning with octave and octave-pkg-dev.
I would like to have Octave updated in unstable before the release of
3.8 sometime in June[1]. This gives us the opportunity to check whether
we can indeed cope with a new soname really early in the Jessie cycle,
which is about as perfect as timing can be.
[1] http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Release-Plans-td4652127.html
> I am not entirely happy with the current situation where both Thomas and
> me are listed in the Uploaders field of almost all DOG packages. I don’t
> think this reflect the true situation with respect to package
> maintainership. I would prefer a situation where we are listed only in
> the packages in which we are truly interested (and for those packages
> which no one is interested in, then we distribute them randomly across
> us, or we keep the current situation). I think it would also be good if
> Rafael was listed as Uploader for his packages of interest (note that
> this does not require the DM or DD status, even though I would be very
> happy if Rafael was taking back one of these), but this is his call. And
> of course, since the packages are team maintained, this would not
> prevent one of us to fix other people's packages, especially in case of
> RC bug.
My reading of [2] is that we must have one human in the Uploaders field.
Of course, we have some packages about which we do not care too much
personally, but which we keep for various reasons. I do not have a
strong opinion here, so if you have some concrete ideas, just go ahead.
[2] http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Uploaders
Thomas
Reply to: