Bug#695849: [SCM] glmark2/master: RFP/ITP bug #695849 assigned
On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 00:32:19 Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> > It doesn't make any sense to move package repository to collab-maint
> > whenever there is less than two active maintainers. Wouldn't we push
> > less active packages away from pkg-multimedia like this?
> Yes, and I think this is desireable if we do not want pkg-multimedia
> to deter to "some other multimedia-related Debian QA"-group. Let's
> please leave that for the proper Debian QA group.
> > You're talking about desirable (ideal) situation.
> I'm not sure if I understand this comment.
I meant to say that 2 maintainers per package is ideal and desirable situation
which is not necessarily true for every single package in team. :)
> >> > It feels a bit like "finish it or leave"... Speaking about finishing,
> >> > did you have a chance to try it? Do you think it is useful despite
> >> > failure of some opengl (but not opengl-es) tests? If so I'm happy to
> >> > own ITP even though it might not be a right time for me.
> >> Sorry, I neither have time nor interest to investigate glmark2, nor do
> >> I find glmark2 particularly in scope of pkg-multimedia. Moreover, the
> >> svn-buildpackage style packaging already deterred me enough to refrain
> >> me to take a closer look.
> > Sorry Reinhard, I didn't know you feel so strong about it. Of course I'll
> > move the package to collab-maint if you insist. Otherwise I'll convert
> > its repository to git-buildpackage layout so we can decide whenever we
> > want it in pkg-multimedia. Thanks.
> It's not that I really "insist" on something. I'm wondering what is
> the best way to go with the package. While not uploaded yet, it
> already does consume considerable team ressources, and since it seems
> that nobody else in the team is interested in the package, I feel that
> you would have less effort with leaving the packaging style as it is
> and just move the repository to collab-maint.
Perhaps not enthusiastically enough I expressed my interest and I'm willing to
prioritise if you feel that I should. But I'm only one person so I'll move
glmark2 to collab-maint within few days.
I only regret about my little contribution to the team's existing packages.
Perhaps if I were more active you would be less concerned about
> Sorry if my previous mails on the package were too harsh.
Not at all, I think they were straightforward and sincere. :)
I respect that.
> I strongly
> suspect that we have a number of other packages within the team with
> the same issues as glmark2. Nevertheless, I do not intend to play the
> "team police" game proactively, but only when I stumble upon (obvious)
> problems in problematic package. I would appreciate if other active
> team members would join this effort.
> Happy new year! :-)
Happy New Year indeed. :)