[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Ubuntu/Debian cooperation [was: Complaint about #debian operator]

On 12/15/05, Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > > > Every "relevant" change put into the BTS would be nice, yes.  Filing
> > >
> > > Notice that it is official ubuntu directive to *NOT* do that, that is to not
> > > send patches directly to the BTS,
> >
> > Please give a reference to this directive. I am part of the MOTU team,
> > and have never heared about such a directive.
> Personal mail or irc reference from Colin Watson when i complained about him
> having filled a bug against parted with a link to a patch, and the link then
> dissapeared. I have had confirmation from this fact by others later on, and
> even said something about this in the bug report in question or here in the
> past, and was not chalenged. This was almost a year ago now though, and things
> may have changed.

Be assured that there is no directive in any way that prohibits MOTUs
to use the BTS. Since you are mentioning IRC, you may be confused by
other statements. It is true that some MOTUs don't consider submitting
to debian bts as priority because of bad experiences they had because
of unresponsive and unhelpful Debian Maintainers.

Besides, most of the patches I've done so far are rather patches
applied from debian bts, or fixes caused of transitions we do before
debian. For other fixes (like improvements to .desktop files and such)
we are actually encouraged to submit do debian bts, because that way
we can simply sync the package from debian again and have less work
when merging the package on the next debian upload.

An other big load of patches are because we take new upstream versions
of the package. Do you really want that we submit a patch updating to
new upstream version? please not.

Summarizing: We are indeed interested in getting our changes into
debian, because this reduces our work when merging.

> > > Friendly,
> > sorry, this is unfriendly distribution of FUD.
> Well, given my sources, i suppose you would reconsider this classification as
> FUD :) It may be outdated info, which would be very very welcome indeed, but
> in no case FUD.

You did imply that MOTU were adviced to NOT collaborate with debian. I
consider this as a implicit insult to the MOTU Team. We DO want to
cooperate, but have to face with accusations like this one or with
unresponsive or unhelpful maintainers, which can be really

Nevertheless, be assured that I do actively suggest on IRC that
patches, which have chance to get accepted by the maintainer to be
sent to debbugs. Others seem to do this as well.


Reply to: