Re: Implementation of Developer's DB
Christian Schwarz <email@example.com> writes:
> Don't believe me?
> Just let me note, that all packages that are currently maintained by
> a group of developers, have a much longer list of outstanding bug
> reports than most one-maintainer packages, for example dpkg,
> boot-floppies, doc-debian containing the FAQ (not much bugs, but the
> FAQ is actually orphaned).
You're ignoring several things. Both dpkg and boot-floppies are very
complex packages, and like any other complex package (X, emacs, perl),
they have lots of bugs. I agree dpkg isn't well maintained at the
moment, but I think that has very little to do with it being group
maintained and much more to do with the fact that a) very few people
are qualified to maintain and fix dpkg, and b) those who are, are,
unfortunately, very busy.
Boot-floppies on the other hand is being actively worked on, although
it might not appear so to the outside world, there is a lot of work
being done. Don't believe me? After 2.0 is released, check the
differences between bo's bootfloppies package and hamm's. Also don't
fall into the trap of judging a package or it's maintainers by the
number of bugs. That's just wrong. In both the case of dpkg and
boot-floppies there are lots of bugs which are non-trivial to fix
(e.g. "dselect sucks").
> This does not mean that we don't allow several maintainers to work
> on the same package. However, one of them should be listed as
> maintainer and feel "responsible" for the package and possible bugs.
If you got several people working on a package, why should one person
be responsible for the bugs of other people? That's silly.