Hi, On 15/9/19 3:31 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 9/14/19 6:59 AM, Balasankar "Balu" C wrote: >> But it shouldn't matter to the project that I do my packaging work in >> GitLab.com or GitHub.com because as far as Debian is concerned, as long >> as others can contribute without having an account in that service - I >> should not be forbidden using them. That is, if I come in and say "I >> won't accept any patches submitted over BTS, but only GitHub PRs", the >> project has every right to kick the package out of Debian or fork it. >> But as long as I continue supporting people using BTS, I should be fine >> using whatever I want as my primary platform. > > Could you explain why you'd have VCS fields then, if not to advertise > what the addres of your Git? Isn't this an invitation to use the > platform you're pointing at, as a mean to modify your package?
My understanding is that it is an additional avenue for people to get more details about a package, how it is managed, and/or to contribute to the work. It does not automatically override BTS as a place to file issues or contribute patches to. That is still there. > >> So will the GR be >> "You must not do any sort of contribution to Debian using non-free >> software/hardware" >> >> or >> >> "You can use anything you want to contribute to Debian, but there should >> be a way for other people to contribute to your work in Debian without >> compromising on their freedom" ? (This translates to my words in the >> beginning of this reply - patches over BTS must not be rejected by a >> maintainer) > > Of course, the later. I don't care if a contributor is using Debian in a > VM running on Windows, as long as he/she doesn't force me to do the > same. That's the same spirit with using a non-free Git platform. Thanks for clarifying - from reading your initial mail what I understood was that you meant the former. I stand corrected in my understanding. > > It is a real life experience that I had to touch horribly maintained > packages by unknown contributors, with Vcs-Git: > https://github.com/<foo>/<bar>, missing commits not matching the > archive, and no response from the maintainer to the BTS (even for RC > bugs). Isn't this why we have an NMU process (for the package and an MIA process for the maintainer). Personally, I consider Debian archive and BTS as the single source of truth for any package in Debian - yet. Regards Balu