Re: unauthorized upload of xfree86 4.3.0-1 to unstable
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 01:08:19PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
>...
> I did, however, state that I felt that 4.3.0-1 was by far the superior
> base to work from in sid, for a number of reasons (not least that
> propagation to sarge would put the XSF in the position of having to
> maintain two codebases, not three).
>
> > Organizationally, we have more experience with single-maintainer
> > packages, and I think we have to evolve a bit with respect to team
> > maintenance a bit more. Fundamentally, I think team-maintenance of
> > packages has to be grounded on mutual trust among the members of the
> > team. I personally feel that my trust was betrayed in this situation.
> > If you think I should not feel this way, please explain why.
>
> I think another issue Branden was possibly trying to raise - that we
> was raised privately - is the team-maintainership model where you have a
> leader/follower(s), and whether that needs to be formalised, if/when the
> follower(s) can disobey the leader, et al. XSF was very much
> leader/follower, as you can see here, as opposed to models of other
> teams, which are very much equal/meritorious.
The main question is not whether XFree86 4.3.0 should enter unstable now
or whether it should stay in experimental for the near future [1]. The
question is whether the way you acted was right or wrong.
It seems abvious that Branden is (no matter whether it's formalised or
not) the leading developer of the Debian XFree86 packages.
Branden is the leader and doing an upload of a new major release without
his OK is definitely not a good thing. It might be non-pleasing, but if
you disagree with the leading Debian XFree86 developer, it might be
similar to the case when someone disagrees with Linus Torvalds in
questions regarding the Linux kernel...
That said, and although I's say that I don't agree with Branden in all
areas, my impression is that it should possible to work together with
him, and if the question isn't "Should XFree86 4.3.0 enter unstable
now?" but instead "What's missing until everyone (including Branden)
considers XFree86 4.3.0 to be ready for unstable?" might lead to
constructive work like Nathanaels' checking of the 4.2.1 patches and a
solution that's acceptable for everyone.
> Daniel Stone <daniels@debian.org>
cu
Adrian
[1] I'd personally prefer XFree86 4.3.0 in unstable now.
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
Reply to: