Hi, [ Your question is similar in some ways to a question asked earlier by Lars Wirzenius. See my answer at https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2013/03/msg00020.html ]
On 12/03/13 at 20:17 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Hi, > > this is a question to all candidates. > > Debian's infrastructure and processes have grown organically over the > years, with all the strengths and weaknesses that it implies. Sometimes > it's a good idea to step back and look whether some of those need > to be amended/replaced/dropped/etc. Indeed. I think that the organic growth of Debian's infrastructure and processes is a great strength of Debian. It's technically very easy to experiment an idea by starting to develop a service, and get it linked from important places such as the PTS so that everybody can benefit from it. That's something we should encourage. > Based on your own experience, which infrastructure(s) or process(es) would > benefit from significant changes? Before answering your question, I'd like to state that the situation has generally improved greatly over the last years. There are still some grey areas, but when I started contributing to Debian, there were entire process that were sometimes stuck for months. > Are there infrastructures or processes that we're (still) lacking and that > could make a significant difference in the work of Debian's contributors? I see two main areas of improvement: - We should ensure that process that are regularly blocking contributors with no easy way to circumvent them work as smoothly as possible. If elected, I will closely monitor such processes to be proactive. - We still lack some infrastructure to help with team maintenance. We have PET (http://pet.alioth.debian.org/), which is great, but many teams are not using it yet. It should probably be advertised/generalized a bit more. More generally, there's the problem of combining information found on all pieces of the Debian infrastructure. Quoting my platform: Debian services (dak, wanna-build, BTS, DEHS, popcon, lintian, etc.) are very much heterogeneous in terms of technologies and interfaces. The positive impact is that it is very easy for anyone to develop another service and get it integrated into our existing infrastructure. The negative impact is that it is very hard to combine data. Ultimate Debian Database solves that by importing all relevant data about Debian (and derivative distributions) into a single SQL database. Several services have been developed on top of UDD (including bugs.cgi and Debian Maintainer Dashboard) and many others rely on UDD as a data source. (Note that unfortunately, UDD no longer contains data from PET about VCS -- that importer is broken since PET moved to alioth.) Lucas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130312212854.gc10...@xanadu.blop.info
