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

Re: Emphasize teams, not packages

(M-F-T set.)

[Frans Jessop]
> When somebody wants to become a DD he is told ?Go find a package to
> maintain, one that you can be the maintainer for.?  I see serious
> problems with this approach as Debian increases in DD's.  I will how
> this is in a second.  What I think should be emphasized is ?Go find a
> package team and join it and contribute and show your stuff.?

The point of maintaining a package is to prove that you *can* maintain
a package.  Being on a team proves nothing.  Being on a team and doing
most of the work proves something, if this can be measured, but that's
difficult.  As it happens, I'm on at least one team where I do a
majority of the work, and at least one team in name only (haven't yet
done *any* work).  I don't particularly expect to be judged favorably
for the one or unfavorably for the other, because it's just too hard to
get the data.

> I think Debian needs to emphasize teams packaging, not just
> individuals for many reasons.

We've had this conversation already.  So I'll skip it.  Besides, there
are lots of things we need to emphasise in Debian.  We've had those
conversations, too.

> Future A:
> There are now 10,000 DD's and over 100,000 packages, most nobody
> uses, they are just there because they were needed by people who
> wanted to become DD's.

Obvious solution: Change the requirement from "maintain a package" to
"maintain a package that a significant number of people care about".
Since AMs / DAMs are people rather than machines, we don't need an
accurate automated metric for this - something as vague as popcon
should be quite sufficient to reveal the difference between useful
packages and pet packages only ever installed by people who said to
themselves "hmmm I wonder what this does" and then never bothered to
uninstall them.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: