Re: Debian P2P Team
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Andrea Veri wrote: > hi, > Hi, > since some time I'm wondering why there is *not* a Debian-p2p team > active already. We have several p2p-related packages in the archive and > it looks like they are maintained individually and not by a specific > team. Therefore I would like to add some questions about this: > > 1. Why no one had the idea to make such a team yet? I think like you, why not? > 2. is this the right case to set up a new team that will take care of > every p2p-related package? create a p2p network around repository sound interesting. > 3. and if yes, someone willing to help developing / creating a new team > like the other ones active on the Debian Project already? (like the > Python Team, or the Gnome Team or ...) > I can help to do this project reality, and have resources to do either. > Of course, the first thing we should focus on is creating a good > collaboration between all maintainers, that should agree moving their > work to a team-like way. > Of course. > > Let me know if you have any thoughts about this. > Let's go! Regards, Brivaldo Jr (condector) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Debian P2P Team
Hi, On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 02:10:28AM +0200, Andrea Veri wrote: > since some time I'm wondering why there is *not* a Debian-p2p team > active already. We have several p2p-related packages in the archive and > it looks like they are maintained individually and not by a specific > team. Is there a specific problem you are trying to solve? > Of course, the first thing we should focus on is creating a good > collaboration between all maintainers, that should agree moving their > work to a team-like way. I don't think people "should" change their workflow if there is no visible need. Simon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Debian P2P Team
Simon Richter ha scritto: > Is there a specific problem you are trying to solve? Actually there isn't a specific problem, I just think working as a team might improve the quality of packages when, for istance, a MIA maintainer leaves his package orphaned for long time without having no one looking at it. This way the fact to have a team behind all packages might reassure users about having their problems fixed without any consistent delay. > > I don't think people "should" change their workflow if there is no visible > need. Well, I don't think we should call this a true 'workflow' change, operating as a team can make things easier for everyone, above all for maintainers who are pretty busy and unable to provide new revisions in a small period of time. Andrea -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Debian P2P Team
Hi, On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 05:14:57PM +0200, Andrea Veri wrote: > Actually there isn't a specific problem, I just think working as a team > might improve the quality of packages when, for istance, a MIA > maintainer leaves his package orphaned for long time without having no > one looking at it. I think it decreases the quality of packages if a MIA maintainer leaves his package orphaned and everyone, including the maintainer, assumes that the team will step in. I also have found that for team-maintained packages, I felt less and less responsible for packages after receiving mails that told me that they had "fixed" some deliberate choice I made. The same people hell-bent on having every package team-maintained will not stand idly by if a stanza for a shared library package is commented out because the ABI is unstable. > This way the fact to have a team behind all packages > might reassure users about having their problems fixed without any > consistent delay. Please let's not forget that users running unstable are expected to be able to diagnose and work around problems themselves. There is no value in adding quick hacks to get rid of bug reports. Teams make sense if most of the packages in the group follow the same structure, for example perl packages, and maintainers are essentially exchangeable because one does not need to understand how the software in question actually works. Grouping packages by "field" does not work so well, because there is overlap between fields, and individual packages within a group are fundamentally different. In fact, I find that having distinct maintainers for packages that integrate with each other is a definite advantage because it requires people to actually communicate to each other about interfaces and transition strategies. > Well, I don't think we should call this a true 'workflow' change, Yes, it is. I need to switch to the team maintenance tool of the month when otherwise I could just call dpkg-buildpackage. > operating as a team can make things easier for everyone, above all for > maintainers who are pretty busy and unable to provide new revisions in a > small period of time. New revisions are not always good. I'd rather see a maintainer skip a revision because they did not manage to find the time to test it than have bleeding edge software that has not been looked at by anyone who actually uses it. Simon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Debian P2P Team
Simon Richter ha scritto: > I also have found that for team-maintained packages, I felt less and less > responsible for packages after receiving mails that told me that they had > "fixed" some deliberate choice I made. The same people hell-bent on having > every package team-maintained will not stand idly by if a stanza for a > shared library package is commented out because the ABI is unstable. I agree with you here. > Teams make sense if most of the packages in the group follow the same > structure, for example perl packages, and maintainers are essentially > exchangeable because one does not need to understand how the software in > question actually works. yeah, unfortunately p2p-related packages are written in several different languages from C to python so it would be pretty hard for maintainers to change their way of working cause too many differences between their packages and the ones they would have to work on as a *team*. Actually, I agree with your view about this and I think leaving everything as it is, should be the best choice for everyone. Thanks for the fast responses and for your suggestions, Andrea -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Debian P2P Team
Andrea Veri wrote: >> Teams make sense if most of the packages in the group follow the same >> structure, for example perl packages, and maintainers are essentially >> exchangeable because one does not need to understand how the software in >> question actually works. Teams also make sense when most team members are active users of most of the applications they co-maintain. -- Felipe Sateler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
