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

Re: package ownership in Debian

On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 02:49:34AM +0000, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> On 7/29/06, Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> wrote:
> >On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 14:11:03 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh 
> ><hmh@debian.org> said:
> >
> >> On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, martin f krafft wrote:
> >>> also sprach Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
> >>> [2006.07.28.1737 +0100]:
> >>> > If Debian had slightly less of a culture of "Keep your hands off
> >>> > my package", I'd do it here instead.
> >>>
> >>> I've been thinking about this a lot for the past week.
> >>>
> >>> Is there any way this could be changed?
> >
> >> Yes, and we could start by really enforcing co-maintainership.  Make
> >> it 100% mandatory for all essential, required and base packages at
> >> first.
> >
> >        Err, I am not sure co-maintaining packages actually
> > unequivocally improves packaging quality or response times. There are
> > teams that work well for a packagfe, and then there are packages
> > where  team maintainence has not worked out.
> It won't improve packages from the first day, but in my experience it
> has improved the way i can communicate with people. It's easier for me
> talk with a member or two in a group and sometimes join them
> temporarily and help. The one-man approach, when this one-man is a
> freak hurts the project,

True. But if you use that as an argument, then you are implying that
either all lone maintainers are freaks, or that a one-man approach isn't
all that bad after all.

I can only agree with the latter ;-P

> >        Co-maintainerships require communication, and ability and
> > desire to share decisions, can result in  a culture of "it is someone
> > elses problem (neat aphorism in german, I believe)", and if the team
> > does not trust one of the members, then things can turn ugly.
> >
> >        Sometimes, too many cooks do indeed spoil the broth.
> I think the debian-installer guys can tell you otherwhise.

I don't think Manoj contested that. But he's right when he says that
"group maintenance" is not the magic wand that fixes all problems even
slightly related to package maintenance.

In short:
If people want to maintain packages in group, great.
If people want to encourage group maintenance of packages, more power to
If people want to _enforce_ me to group-maintain one or more of the
packages I'm working on, that'll be the day I leave the project.

Fun will now commence
  -- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4

Reply to: