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

Re: package ownership in Debian

On 7/28/06, Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@debian.org> wrote:
Le ven 28 juillet 2006 22:40, MJ Ray a écrit :
> Joerg Jaspert <joerg@debian.org> wrote:
> > Simply change the NMUs to be always 0-day, for all bugs >=3Dnormal.
> > Which means - upload and mail to BTS at the same time.
> Would that mean we get BTS+NMU tennis instead of BTS tennis,
> where differences of opinion over what is a serious bug result
> in 0-day NMUs as well as BTS reopens?
> […]
> I'm not sure what the solution is, but 0-day always seems a big
> step backwards for Quality Control.  More co-maints seems a
> better idea as a step forwards.

I've seen more problems of bad maintainers with bad packages, than of
irrevertible broken NMUs. Yes shit happen, but well, if you don't move,
things rot, which is not much better.

Yes, and we need to remember that we're talking about "broken" stuff
in sid that
shouldn't hurt too much.

do you know a thing that could benefit from that ?
 - unofficial ports (kfreebsd e.g.) for whom it's a real PITA to have
   their patches (often of *excellent* quality) to get it.

 - theming squad (yeah, debian is the sole distro in which the desktops
   don't have some kind of homgenous look, making it utterly horrible
   for the newbie) that would just have to integrate their themes,
   icons, in the right desktop packages.

 - transitions: I'm the menu packager, I want to change how some option
   of menu files are handled, no problem, I go to the lintian lab, lists
   all the packages that will have to be fixed, and DO AN UPLOAD FIXING
   THEM AT THE SAME TIME instead of waiting for some 2 or 3 lazy
   maintainers that will apply that only 4 monthes later (did you
   noticed the /usr/doc transition is still NOT over ?)

and I'm sure you can make an arm long list just thinking for a couple of

Great use cases for this proposal! Btw, while we're at this theme
stuff. There's
desktop-base that i would like to push forward with some consensus between
pkg-gnome, pkg-kde and xfce maintainers at least. I started some work on the
package but need to try organize a online meeting about this with the parties
involved. If you're interested in this, contact me off list first please.

Just think how smooth the g++4.1 transition was. Why was it ? because
tbm took all the buggy packages, waited 4 or 5 days for the maintainers
to fix them, or show they were active about that, and NMUed the rest.
I've never ever seen a more clean and quick transition in debian.
TTBOMK nobody even tried to complain. But I also think that nobody
dared to because it was tbm. Would a random DD have tried the same
thing, that wouldn't have been *that* easy.

Agreed, and glad he did that.

-- stratus

Reply to: