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

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

On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 12:46:41PM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> 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

Yeah, and i am an idiot which don't remember my own name. Ask the ubuntu guys
about this, it was a clear "big boss doesn't want to allow it, and i do what
management says" kind of info. That said, it may be different for ubuntu
employees and random maintainers.

> to debian bts as priority because of bad experiences they had because
> of unresponsive and unhelpful Debian Maintainers.

Yeah, but this is not always the case, and those unhelpful maintainers in
debian suck.

> 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.

nope, but in general more shared work is a welcome thing, even having the same
group of people co-maintain packages for debian and ubuntu and such.

> 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

I was implying that ubuntu employees where supposed to not file patches as
attachement to debian BTS, and instead send links to the ubuntu patch
database, links which may or may not stay alive for the time needed until the
patch is handled, or until someone in some random future want to look at it.
That this was a voluntary decision of ubuntu's management, and something which
i believe is not in the best interest of debian, be it only for the perenity
of said patches in some unforseeable future.

> consider this as a implicit insult to the MOTU Team. We DO want to

Yeah, eyeah, whatever. I may not have been clear enough, maybe, and if so i
apologize, but i believe that your tone also is somewhat over-agressive.

> cooperate, but have to face with accusations like this one or with
> unresponsive or unhelpful maintainers, which can be really
> frustrating.

Yeah, whatever. Let's take two examples : 

  parted: i have been forced to take over parted because the previous
  maintainer left debian after some MIA period, i had a call for help open
  since over a year, and instead of the ubuntu folk fixing stuff directly in
  the parted svn, they submitted links to patches, and once i found time to
  apply them, the link had rotten.

  gparted: not present in debian/sarge, but present in ubuntu at that time.
  Why was it not uploaded to both debian and ubuntu in the first place, from
  some common code base ? I would have gladly sponsored such uploads, but no,
  it did not happen.

There is cooperation and helpfulness involved beyond the just "file random
amount of patches", and even as i see the ubuntu guys helpful on this, i feel
that in some cases, the bare minimum and nothing more is done in this

> 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.

Yep, but do you send them as attachement, or just links ? 


Sven Luther
> --
> regards,
>     Reinhard
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Wanadoo vous informe que cet  e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail.
> Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte.

Reply to: