On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 01:15:00AM +0000, Steve McIntyre wrote: > >What do you think about such a proposal? > > I'd be quite worried about the blocking potential of such a move, > actually. One of the reasons that Debian scales so well is that *most* > of the work we do day-to-day does not depend on the work of a small > core team. That means that we can continue to work independently and > get the major package work done without having to co-ordinate > everything and share decisions all the time. If we *did* end up with > such a core team, then I'd bet money on them always being over-worked. > It wouldn't start that way, but it would get there. Your people with > "enough free time" quickly wouldn't have. :-) To not repeat myself over and over again :-), did you see my mail exchange with Stefano? It explains how I think how should be dealt with it. > Of course, there are places where our work does need co-ordination, > like before a release. And those are the places where we often end up > needing large teams doing a lot of work just to do that co-ordination. Well, coordination is the one thing. But something that is lacking in Debian at all is serious Quality Assurance /while/ in a release cycle (we have some basic QA during the freeze period, because the release team needs to review every package that wants to get in, but that is.. not much and not enough). As we are dependent on the work of volunteers we cannot solve this problem for the whole archive, but we should try to solve it at least for the core tools every user is dependent on, which is something were teams or a single big team would probably be a step in the right direction. > I'm much more convinced about encouraging people to set up individual > teams for core packages, and then finding enough people to help cover > the needs of those packages. More keen NMs are always good here... Well the difference is only the number of persons. Which doesn't need to be a difference at all. But I'm open to that as well, I just think we should make it the default that those package are team-maintained and we should have a fallback where those teams aren't setup on their own by their individual maintainers. Regards, Patrick
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature