Re: invitation for you and your packages to join the pkg-perl team

[Dominic Hargreaves <dom@earth.li>]

On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 04:51:51PM +0200, Axel Beckert wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > Subject: invitation for you and your packages to join the pkg-perl team
> 
> O.o
> 
> I assume that you know, that I'm already a (more or less active) team
> member.

Indeed, the message was intended to cater for that case too, so I'm
sorry if that didn't come across.

> And I'm well aware of the fact that I maintain perl-related
> official Debian packages which are not maintained under the Debian
> Perl Team's umbrella.
> 
> Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> > libcgi-github-webhook-perl
> > librun-parts-perl
> 
> JFTR: You're missing dh-dist-zilla.

I only considered lib*-perl packages - it would be infeasible (and
undesirable) to identify all packages using perl.

> They're all not maintained under the Debian Peal Team's umbrella on
> purpose as they're those perl-related packages where I'm also (one of
> the) upstream developer(s) and which were written out of own needs.

That's absolutely fine, it was intended to be a welcoming invitation,
and we're fine with people still doing this of course. I will make a note
of your wishes for the future in case we want to repeat this process or
one like it.

[reasons to not want to maintain packages with pkg-perl snipped]

> So, no, I won't maintain Perl packages, where I'm upstream, too, and
> which I primarly wrote for my own needs, under the Debian Perl Team,
> be it current or future packages.
> 
> P.S.: This does not count for debian-specific native packages which I
> adopted for Debian respectively the Debian Perl Team like debsums or
> equivs. There I consider the Debian Perl Team as a whole to be
> upstream, not only myself. That's a huge difference from Perl modules
> I wrote primarily for my own needs, also on an emotional level.
> 
> P.P.S. and JFTR: If the case that I become MIA ever happens, the
> Debian Perl Team may take over any of my perl-related packages (after
> having discussed it with potential co-maintainers).

Thanks for the clarification!

Best,
Dominic.