On Thursday, April 12, 2012 09:12:23 PM Sandro Tosi wrote: > On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 16:13, Scott Kitterman <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > I don't think that the *-defaults packages and the interpreter packages > > fundamentally require the same maintainer, but I expect it to be > > problematic to have different teams maintain them if each team has the > > other as a member as they are both strong personalities. > > could you please elaborate a bit? what is the problem you see? > *-defaults define the policy and the default version of python, while > python* is just the interpreter packages (big packages, but not even > *that* complicated; f.e. the most scary point, problems on weird > archs, is currently delegated to porters). I don't even see that much > collaboration needed here (not that it would hurt), so I'd like to > hear your doubts. The most controversial decisions (as I see it) the the Debian Python community have been around when to introduce new versions, when the switch defaults, and when to drop old versions. These decisions need an understanding between the maintainers of the interpreter packages and the maintainers of the defaults packages. The Python policy (that is in python-defaults) defines some of the requirements for the interpreter packages. I haven't seen a lot of controversy around this, but it is another point where there would have to be some consensus. I'm not saying such things can't be solved, but if there are two teams they need to work together. Scott K
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.