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

Re: package ownership in Debian (was: Why does Ubuntu have all the ideas?)

Le ven 28 juillet 2006 19:15, Fabio Tranchitella a écrit :

> 2. There isn't an easy way to check if the maintainer of a package is
>    actually working on the feature/patch which I would like to
> upload, or just to work togheter. Yes, I know that several packages
> are maintained in CVS/SVN/bzr/what-ever-else, but the repositories
> are not centralized and a lot of maintainers don't use revision
> control systems at all.

and that won't happen because I'm not very keen on leraning yet another 
VCS, and that other's think the same, and that you will find poeple 
that never used svn or just can't use it, and poeple that never used 
bzr or don't like it , or ...

what makes Ubuntu able to do this, is that there is a big someone that 
can tell: every package is maintained in bzr, and those who don't agree 
get fired. (exagerated of course, it's just the general idea).

Moreover, not having strong maintainership in Ubuntu lead to some 
obscure package to be completely neglected, and some are in a not 
satisfying shape. I attribute that to the fact that nobody is really 
responsible for the package if eventually nobody cares about it. I 
don't say debian does not have problems with some packages, I just say 
that in that case, there is an obvious person to blame. Even teams are 
OK in that regard, because teams are generally small (wrt the number of 

So IMHO, something has to be done so that integration can be easier, 
e.g. making so called NMU be more easily accepted, so that 
nobody/noone/nothing can prevent an actual enhancement of the distro to 
go on. But one should /still/ be responsible for that or that package, 
this is what makes debian special, and I will defend it.
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O                                                madcoder@debian.org
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org

Attachment: pgpiOwJyKxP0b.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: