Re: Tentative summary of the amendments
On 10/24/2014 02:02 PM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Aigars Mahinovs <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 24 October 2014 12:35, Ansgar Burchardt <email@example.com> wrote:
> > In fact, they want to require that if P supports only A (and not A|B)
> > that the maintainers of P have to patch P to make it support B. In the
> > good old days[tm] it would be the responsibility of the people wanting
> > to use B to submit patches to make P work with B (but here I suspect
> > many people demanding support for B do not even use P...).
> And this is exactly why this GR is moot: it contradicts the
> constitution. Even if it passes, you couldn’t force maintainers of A
> (systemd) or P (GNOME, KDE, Xfce) to maintain B (systemd-shim) or fix
> bugs in B.
I don't think it contradicts the constitution: we do require certain
work to accept packages in Debian, like removing non-free stuff,
document copyright holders and licenses, making the package build on
However there needs to be a fairly broad consensus about these
requirements and, if you change the requirements, people willing to
actually do the work. Otherwise we end with this:
> Eventually, bugs in B would result in RC bugs in P that the release team
> would have to ignore because P is too useful.
Which is why I think this GR is a bad idea...