On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 11:48:24AM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 01:20:49PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 11:44:26PM +0200, Jonas Meurer wrote:
> > > On 30/06/2004 Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > > > Are you comfortable with an Uploaders: field for fd.o xlibs that
> > > > > includes myself?
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure *my* comfort level is the first-order term in this equation.
> > > >
> > > > Quoting:
> > > >
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > Daniel, disillusioned and disappoitned ex-'X Strike Force' member[1]
>
> Artful dodge.
Not at all. If you continue to stand by you words, I have no idea why
you'd even be interested in being on the same Uploaders: line as me.
Maybe you could explain it to me?
> > > is it required to be 'x strike force' member for uploading xlibs?
> >
> > One normally doesn't hijack a package (or several of them) away from the
> > current maintainer.
>
> xfree86, it should be noted, is one package.
It's not after it stops being monolithic.
> > The above does not apply, of course, to any parts of fd.o xlibs that aren't
> > already in Deebian.
>
> Which is limited to libx{proto-,}{fixes,damage,composite}.
Okay. But maintaining only those is not what you had in mind, is it?
> > The above *does* apply even if a given upstream package changes its
> > upstream source. When the Xpm library was incorporated into XFree86
> > upstream, I expressed my interest in maintaining its packages as part of
> > XFree86 to the then-current maintainer. AFAIR, he had no objection.
>
> BTW, what you decided to do at a given time, isn't necessarily
> Debian-blessed practice.
So you're asserting that what I work out in mutual agreement with another
package maintainer, under a procedure countenanced by the Debian
Developers' Reference[1], "isn't necessarily Debian-blessed practice"?
Fascinating.
> Does Debian also bless uploading new major versions and adding yourself
> to Uploaders, when the previous one has been bitrotting in experimental
> for far too long?
Nope.
It is not OK to simply take over a package that you feel is neglected —
that would be package hijacking. You can, of course, contact the current
maintainer and ask them if you may take over the package. If you have
reason to believe a maintainer has gone AWOL (absent without leave), see
Dealing with inactive and/or unreachable maintainers, Section 7.4.
Generally, you may not take over the package without the assent of the
current maintainer. Even if they ignore you, that is still not grounds to
take over a package. Complaints about maintainers should be brought up on
the developers' mailing list. If the discussion doesn't end with a
positive conclusion, and the issue is of a technical nature, consider
bringing it to the attention of the technical committee (see the
technical committee web page for more information).[1]
A takeover is a takeover, be it for one release or forever.
> > If Mr. Stone feels there are exigent circumstances at work here, he should
> > say so.
>
> Rather than going out and busting out phrases like 'exigent
> circumstances' and saying as much as possible between the lines[0],
> [0]: Which tends to be a great ploy to later jump out from behind some
> bushes and say 'WRONG! SUCK! I didn't say that!'.
If you want to avoid that, you should try harder not to put words into
people's mouths. I've already caught you doing it once[2].
> would you like to share exactly what you think about a maintainership
> group for xlibs that includes myself?
I haven't decided yet. More importantly, I'm not the sole decision maker
here.
A more fruitful tactic then tilting against my windmill with all this
impassioned rhetoric might be to organize a cadre of supporters among the
current X Strike Force. Dare I defy them all?
If nothing else, the chance of greater personal satisfaction for you would
seem to be much higher. (Not only would you get what you want, you'd get
to rub my nose in it! Vindication could hardly be sweeter.)
[1] http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-pkgs.en.html#s-adopting
[2] Message-ID: <[🔎] 20040709093316.GC11953@redwald.deadbeast.net>
--
G. Branden Robinson | When dogma enters the brain, all
Debian GNU/Linux | intellectual activity ceases.
branden@debian.org | -- Robert Anton Wilson
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature