I didn't vote initiall because I read the below as a summary... On 17 February 2013 01:43, Thomas Kluyver <tho...@kluyver.me.uk> wrote: > On 16 February 2013 09:10, Thomas Goirand <z...@debian.org> wrote: >> >> It would be really stupid to only want to "claim" to be working as part >> of the team, that's not at all what I want to do. I'd like to be able to >> help when I can, and receive help when I need, which is the point of a >> team. > > > I agree there are reasonable reasons to want to maintain something in git, > and it's not ideal to exclude those packages from team maintainership just > because of the VCS question. Although, if it came to that, the team would be > happy to offer advice and assistance for Python packages that aren't > maintained by the team. We all want stuff to work smoothly, whether or not > it's "our" stuff. > > I suggest we take a poll - not as a binding decision, but to get an idea of > the level of support for different courses of action. You're free to attach > more weight to the votes of highly involved team members. > > The following four positions have all been advocated in this thread: > > A - Maintain the status quo, in which DPMT packages may only be maintained > in SVN. > B - As A, but encourage the creation of a separate team where Python modules > can be maintained in git. > C - Allow DPMT-maintained packages to live in SVN or git, so new packages > can be committed to git if the packager prefers. Optionally, we could make > provisions to migrate existing packages. > D - Migrate all the DPMT-maintained packages to git.
DCA -Rob -- Robert Collins <rbtcoll...@hp.com> Distinguished Technologist HP Cloud Services -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caj3hoz0r_ssus4ukgywpaqfq8f_p_d4fvvqkozjjdqt-xhc...@mail.gmail.com
