Michael Biebl:
Hello Niels, hello Sebastian
Hi Michael,
Am 24.03.23 um 16:28 schrieb Niels Thykier:
Sebastian Ramacher:
[...]
Any progress here? If this issue should be fixed for bookworm, time is
running short.
Cheers
I find that anytime I look at this bug my motivation to work on Debian
instantly vanishes. In fact, I cannot even motivate myself to read the
bug log to figure out what the consensus is. Accordingly, I will play
the constitution 2.1.1 and step out of the way.
My attempt to raise this issue with debhelper and the release-team was
to gather a consensus with how to deal with the affected packages.
A change to debhelper seemed liked the most straightforward approach to
me.
I agree with all of this and I think you were both entitled and correct
in raising the issue. I am still open to this being a bug in debhelper.
It was not meant as an attempt to force Niels into something he
feels uncomfortable with, which he obviously does.
I apologize to Niels for that and hereby close this bug report.
Michael
Your reaction here does not match what I had expected from my email and
I suspect my intentions were not perceived by you as I intended them. To
start with the most important points:
You have done *nothing* to me that requires an apology from you.
You have *not* forced me to do something I am uncomfortable with.
As far as I am concerned, there was and is *no* conflict between
you and I.
We are good if you ask me. I am mostly sad that I made you think
otherwise, but that is on me.
Coming back to what I wanted to communicate: Starting with the context,
the timing of my email came after two mails asking for an update on this
bug that had not been answered by anyone. I.e., my email was a response
to the requests for a update on the bug - both requests were in my view
reasonable.
As the named maintainer/uploader of debhelper, there is always an
implicit assumption that I will be proactive in dealing with bugs, when
there is no clear owner of the bug. Especially bugs that affect the
upcoming release during the freeze. Given that I did not see a response
and I could not easily identify a clear owner of the bug, I felt these
emails hanged on me via the implicit assumption.
I wanted to make it very clear that I would *not* be able to live up to
that assumption. If someone wanted this change, they would have to do it
without involving me at any point. I was hoping that someone would take
end to end ownership and deliver it without involving me. As opposed to
a PR/patch that I would have to review - or leaving me to discuss with
the RT what kind of change was acceptable this stage - or leaving me to
reopen the discussion with the tech-ctte whether allowing services in
/usr is acceptable as it would open up for file moves between /lib and
/usr/lib, which they said they would not want when the original bug was
filed (#995569).
I would not have been able to do that and I doubt I will be able to do
that any time soon.
But if someone wanted to do that. Great! It would have been a burden off
my shoulder. On the flip-side, if no one else was willing to do the
work, then I would not have to feel bad about not being able to do it
either. Either way would relieve me of the pressure of this bug.
Eventually, dh_installsystemd (et al.) will probably have to support
/usr/lib. If someone fixes that now, great. If someone fixes later, great.
I do not mind the change. I mind the assumption that I will be doing it
(in this or in future releases). Feel free to reopen this bug. As long
as we all agree that for the timing being, *I* will *not* be interacting
with the bug, do any design or review of the solution, or deal with any
fallout of implementing the solution.
Whoever owns up to dealing with all of that gets to deliver this
feature. They get to do it without having to follow the NMU rules as far
as I am concerned unless a co-maintainer steps up and takes ownership of
this bug, because to me that is part of "stepping out of the way" when
you are not volunteering to do the work.
In summary:
* I do not feel you did anything wrong or owe me an apology.
* I mind doing the work; not the change. If you (anyone) want
this change and you commit to doing it. Please reopen the bug and go
ahead as long as you do not "depend" on or "need" me for any part of
it.
I hope my intentions were more clear this time.
Best regards,
Niels
