On Sunday, April 22, 2012 04:50:32, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 11:49:08AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
If we would converge on a good rule of thumb to replace the nth NMU in
a row to a QA orphaning, then I believe that the updated NMU section
in the Developers
Le Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 09:34:58AM +0200, Jakub Wilk a écrit :
Why is DEP-1 even marked as accepted? It's been rejected after all...
Hi Jakub,
DEP-1 was integrated it in the developers reference, in its revision 3.4.1
released in January 2009. Stefano then marked the DEP accpeted on the DEP
* Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org, 2012-04-22, 11:49:
The point of NMUs is *helping* a maintainer which, for different
reasons, is temporarily unable to fix specific issues in their
packages. If the NMU-er keeps that principle in mind, everything else
descends more or less naturally.
Hi
On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 11:49:08AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
If we would converge on a good rule of thumb to replace the nth NMU in
a row to a QA orphaning, then I believe that the updated NMU section
in the Developers Reference would then stay unchanged for a long time.
I do see value in
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:28:33AM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
Thanks -- however after reading it, my opinion of NMUs has not changed,
except
for lowering of severity level. [And realistically at least in the general
case I don't think another DD is going to do an NMU if a bug is not RC.]
Le Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 05:00:57PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
The point of NMUs is *helping* a maintainer which, for different reasons, is
temporarily unable to fix specific issues in their packages. If the NMU-er
keeps that principle in mind, everything else descends more or less
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 02:57:39PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
Hijacks are what they say on the tin. That's not a tool that should be
part of the toolkit, even as a weapon of last resort. We have a procedure
for orphaning packages whose maintainers are inactive, and we have the TC to
On 04/18/2012 08:27 AM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
If a maintainer isn't (capable of) doing the necessary work on a
package themselves, then after a while the best thing they can do is
admit that and cede control to others. It's not an easy thing to admit
failure like this, but it's better to do it
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 04:57:14PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
what can we do if the maintainer doesn't admit his lack of time or his
lack of skills/knowledge? My understanding is that in Debian, we are
stuck, right? I believe that was the message of Chris: we don't really
have procedures to
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 10:16:56AM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 04:57:14PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
what can we do if the maintainer doesn't admit his lack of time or his
lack of skills/knowledge? My understanding is that in Debian, we are
stuck, right? I believe
On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 10:16 +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
We have hijacks, we have the tech committee: weapons of last resort.
I was thinking about the same issue before this thread. My feeling is
that over the same time period in which we've moved towards team
maintenance, and moved to a lower
On Wednesday, April 18, 2012 04:57:14, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 04/18/2012 08:27 AM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
If a maintainer isn't (capable of) doing the necessary work on a
package themselves, then after a while the best thing they can do is
admit that and cede control to others. It's not an
On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 11:05:38 +0100
Moray Allan mo...@sermisy.org wrote:
On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 10:16 +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
We have hijacks, we have the tech committee: weapons of last resort.
I was thinking about the same issue before this thread. My feeling is
that over the same time
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 10:00:43AM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
Debian has NMUs (Non-Maintainer Uploads) -- however this is mainly meant for
uploading critical bug fixes without having to resort to hijacking the
package, and AFAIK not to be used to upload new versions of the software.
Before
On Wednesday, April 18, 2012 04:57:14 PM Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 04/18/2012 08:27 AM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
If a maintainer isn't (capable of) doing the necessary work on a
package themselves, then after a while the best thing they can do is
admit that and cede control to others. It's not
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org wrote:
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 10:00:43AM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
Debian has NMUs (Non-Maintainer Uploads) -- however this is mainly meant for
uploading critical bug fixes without having to resort to hijacking the
package,
On Wednesday, April 18, 2012 10:21:45, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 10:00:43AM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
Debian has NMUs (Non-Maintainer Uploads) -- however this is mainly meant
for uploading critical bug fixes without having to resort to hijacking
the package, and
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:28:33AM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
The way section 5.11 is written, it implies NMUs are for bug fixes only. It
literally states Fixing cosmetic issues or changing the packaging style in
NMUs is discouraged. Nowhere in the section is it implied that NMUs can be
On Wednesday, April 18, 2012 11:42:33, Jon Dowland wrote:
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:28:33AM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
The way section 5.11 is written, it implies NMUs are for bug fixes only.
It literally states Fixing cosmetic issues or changing the packaging
style in NMUs is
Neil Williams wrote:
Equally, take a care about which packages your packages depend upon
because if there are optional components which bring in dependencies on
shoddy code, you may need to quickly back away from those dependencies
or face your own package being removed.
This conflates the
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 12:20:51PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
Package removal frequently causes collatoral damage, and in my
experience, those doing the removals rarely consider it, and are happy
wasting other people's time.
Sometimes not removing a package causes collatoral damage and wastes
Quoting Chris Knadle (chris.kna...@coredump.us):
for lowering of severity level. [And realistically at least in the general
case I don't think another DD is going to do an NMU if a bug is not RC.]
Have you seen the gazillion of localization NMUs I'm doing for about
4-5 years now? :-)
As
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 10:16:56AM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 04:57:14PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
what can we do if the maintainer doesn't admit his lack of time or his
lack of skills/knowledge? My understanding is that in Debian, we are
stuck, right? I believe
Le Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 10:00:43AM -0400, Chris Knadle a écrit :
But what I'm seeing is that there are in-between states, where there
doesn't
seem to be any correct action to take. If a maintainer is not completely MIA
but is going to not have any time for maintainership for 6 months,
24 matches
Mail list logo
