On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 10:25:11AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Sat, 21 Mar 2009, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 01:11:58PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 01:43:16PM +0100, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote: > > > > What do you think about such a proposal? > > > > > > Why are you asking the DPL candidates what they think of this proposal, > > > instead of proposing it to the developers? > > > > Well, because it is in line with the questions which they have been > > asked and its both a good chance to see weither they stand on a similar point > > as I do and to see weither anyone is interested in the idea > > at all. Surely I intend to propose it to the larger body once its more then > > a rough idea. > > I expressly refrained to answer your mail because it targetted the DPL > candidate but IMO it's one those "false good ideas until you make it a > reality". I'm all for a team of many people improving the base packages, > so find those people and start triaging and writing patches _together_ > with the actual maintainers. Well, some time back I wrote some patches for coreutils. Unfortunately they are not yet integrated, but thats not the fault of the maintainer. However I think it could help if the project decides that this is a good idea and (if needed) can overrrule single maintainers. Because you surely know that there are people who simply don't accept the fact, that they are overloaded with the work they beared on themselves. > But don't explain your plan by saying "maintainers of core packages suck" > (even if they sometimes do) but rather with "we want our core packages to > be in the best possible shape and we will help the maintainers to achieve > this goal". Thats not what I did. Telling that our core tools have a large number of bugs that are partially ignored, however, is something one could say, while not saying that the maintainers of the packages suck. > PS: You didn't reply to -project about the metric of bugs (25 normal bugs > == 1 RC bug). I hoped we could turn this discussion on something positive > to improve the fate of core packages. Which one? One that were started shortly before the Lenny release? Atleast I replied in a similar thread and said that it would be a good idea. Regards, Patrick
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature