Re: Debian Science Policy: First draft online and open for discussion
> > > 1. What license should we use for the document?
> >
> > Is there so much in the worth protectable? Otherwise making it public
> > domain or basically public domain looks also like a choice to consider.
>
> No. PD would be my choice as well. Don't know about Sylvestre's opinion
> on that.
I don't mind about the license of this document. As long it is free.
> > | but <ulink url="http://packages.debian.org/cdbs";>CDBS</ulink> is preferred.
> >
> > Just my 0.02¢ vote against this. (Or at least mention debhelper as equal).
>
> Debhelper is of course fine too and I like it much. The reason for that
> is that from my experience in teams CDBS can reduce the time needed for
> QA work a lot if upstream's build system is not horribly broken. But I
> do know that a lot of people have strong feelings about that, usually
> not too positive. It has it's disadvantages but especially in teams it
> was valuable for me more than once. (I usually use CDBS + Debhelper.)
> I'll add a paragraph about that. We can also change it to Debhelper.
> That's what is discussion is for: To find a consensus about that. At the
> moment, it is just a suggestion.
We can recommand both.
CDBS really helps for nice upstream and easier for someone who wants to
help to understand quickly it.
> > * Other stuff:
> >
> > I'm missing something explicit about general comitt rights/etiquette.
> > Can anyone add himself to the Uploaders of every package? Who is allowed to
> > make which modifications to which packages's repository? Are obvious
> > non-intrusive fixes in other people's packages in the project ok?
> > And stuff like that.
>
> Good point, I really did not think about that all the way through. I
> personally would be OK if someone from the team would make non-intrusive
> changes, meaning something that one would i.e. change in an NMU.
It is the principle of the team. ;)
> With Uploaders, this is a little different. I think of Uploaders as the
> "Maintainer" field for the team, meaning that the people listed there
> are the ones who would normally be in the Maintainer field and do most
> of the work. I would not like people to add theirselfs without asking
> but could accept it.
I don't think (or I hope) anybody would do that without an important
work on it. Anyway, the main maintainer of the package can still remove
it if he feels unhappy.
We could add in the policy that someone who wants to be added as
Uploader must ask the permission to the main maintainer on the
debian-science-maintainer mailing list.
Sylvestre
Reply to: