Re: Results of the porter roll call (Was: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing)
On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 11:11:56PM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
> On 2013-10-06 16:25, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Hi Niels,
> >
>
> Hey,
>
> (Dropping -devel and -ports in exchange for -powerpc; sounded like you
> weren't subscribed to -powerpc, so direct CC for you as well)
Seem fine.
> > I don't know upto what point you are familiar with my history and its link to the powerpc
> > port, but it pains me to see that the powerpc port is left with so few porters, and that it
> > may mean the port being dropped. I also have not really followed the mailing lists since
> > a long time, and don't know who is actually managing the powerpc port, but giving the (1) and
> > 0.5 remark, i guess there is not a full porter.
> >
>
> I am not familiar with your history, so I cannot comment on that part.
I was kicked out of debian 7 years ago, due to a personal conflict with a couple of other DDs.
I have left this behind me, and i think 7 years is enough for everyone to let this behind it,
and 6 month ago, i was allowed again to post on debian lists, and there apparently was no
negative feedback on that.
Still I don't want to cause problems, even though i had one nice return to my mail which warmed
my hearth, so before you add me or something, could you please check with the DPL or ask on
debian-private or something to be sure this is ok. If you like more details please ask some other
DDs who were there at the time, i think it is not my place to speak about it, and as said, it is
history for me.
> Based on the feedback I got so far we indeed (and still) only got one
> DD backing powerpc and my interpretation of that response is that Roger
> did not consider himself a "main/full" porter. So, I think the powerpc
> port would do well with more DDs backing it.
>
> > So given that, and provided debian may not see a problem again in me becoming active, i may
> > be interested in becoming active again as powerpc maintainer. Not sure what category you
> > can include me in though, and what the formalities would be should i become active (and welcome)
> > in debian again.
>
> Assuming you can work with the current powerpc porter(s), I believe
> there should be no issue adding you as a non-DD porter for now. For
> now, I have not added you to my list, but feel free to let me know if I
> should ammend it.
Well, i will most assuredly have no problem with working with anyone of good will, if you gave me
(privately) the name of the porter and other volunteers, i could contact them to make sure they
have no trouble with me (but back then i don't think there was any powerpc people with whom i had
bad contact too, quite the contrary).
I would need to get access to a debian/powerpc machine though, as i don't travel with a powerpc laptop
anymore (my G4 powerbook hinges are broken and apple left powerpc), and i travel a lot.
> > Also, i am not really sure of the amount of time i will be able to devote to debian, and i will
> > have to take my powerpc hardware out of the storage area i put it in, but i guess it should be enough
> > to do powerpc porting work, provided other folk help me out. That said, i am also interested in the
> > powerpcspe port, as i am (slowly) working on a open-hardware Freescale P1010 based board.
>
> Time and devotion is probably the essence of this roll call. Above
> everything else, we really want to know whether there are still active
> people (or, rather, an active team) behind the ports, who can solve
> problems in a timely fashion.
Well, it mostly depends on the amount and complexity of the problems :) And what timely means.
>From my experience as lead powerpc porter back then, there were usually no major problems, powerpc
being quite mainstream. That said, i don't know upto what point the port still stays in good shape today.
> > Anyway, please let me know if there is anything i can do.
> >
> > Friendly,
> >
> > Sven Luther
> >
> > [...]
>
> Ensuring there is an active team behind the powerpc is a must; having
> more active DDs behind it is currently a must[1]. I am sure there are
> other possible ways to help the ppc port, but those two are the only
> ones I am currently aware of.
I would gladly become DD again in some future time, even if i don't think i will be taking as much responsability
as i used to do, given my busy professional live.
> ~Niels
>
> [1] As mentioned in the mail you replied to, we are considering to
> revise the requirements for the number of DDs. But for now, the old
> requirement of 5 DDs still stand.
Well, as said, powerpc used to be in pretty much good shape, and didn't require much
work. I don't think there ever were 5 DDs being really needed to keep it in shape.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
>
>
Reply to: