Re: intend to hijack GnuPG
On 2008-05-02, Stefano Zacchiroli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --zYM0uCDKw75PZbzx Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, May 02, 2008 at 07:36:25PM +, Sune Vuorela wrote: Yes. But after I have seen Laszlo Boszormenyi bughandling in sqlite3, I think I actually would prefer current maintainance of gnupg. =20 478980 and 478337 Whatever it might have happened on those 2 bug reports, which I haven't read, I find really annoying your public blaming behaviour. Didn't this thread by the way more or less start with public blaming of current gnupg maintainer? Either step in and offer help or shut up. gnupg is a a bit too important package to be maintained by just anyone. I wouldn't have objected if it was unimportant leaf package - as all people have to start somewhere in learning packaging. This is why I am not shutting up. I hope most people will speak up publically in such cases. [1] - oh - and about offering to help: I was so far the one filed the should this package be orphaned-bug against gnupg. And I am planning to follow up on that. (476418) /Sune [1] I am not blaming people for introducing bugs. That can happen. The issue is how people handle it and tries to fix it up. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: intend to hijack GnuPG
On Sat, May 03, 2008 at 09:29:35AM +, Sune Vuorela wrote: Yes. But after I have seen Laszlo Boszormenyi bughandling in sqlite3, I think I actually would prefer current maintainance of gnupg. Whatever it might have happened on those 2 bug reports, which I haven't read, I find really annoying your public blaming behaviour. Didn't this thread by the way more or less start with public blaming of current gnupg maintainer? Not really (IMO). It started with facts on the state of a package and on the MIA status of its only maintainer. On the contrary you have been speculating on the future (in)ability of someone to maintain gpg. Anyhow, my post has probably been too rude and I'm sorry for that, but I really don't think that yours was the way to go. First you need to give Laszlo a chance, based on the fact that he started the hijack procedure, not somebody else. Then, if you think the work is too much for just him go and help. And quite frankly, starting as you did is probably not the good way to set up the ground for synergistic collaboration: it will just piss off people. Yeah, people -- Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ... now what? [EMAIL PROTECTED],cs.unibo.it,debian.org} -%- http://upsilon.cc/zack/ (15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ?/\All one has to do is hit the (15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema\/right keys at the right time signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: intend to hijack GnuPG
On 2008-05-03, Stefano Zacchiroli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: the MIA status of its only maintainer. On the contrary you have been speculating on the future (in)ability of someone to maintain gpg. Anyhow, my post has probably been too rude and I'm sorry for that, but I really don't think that yours was the way to go. First you need to give Laszlo a chance, based on the fact that he started the hijack procedure, not somebody else. I probably could do a long reply here including questioning: - public requests of support should not be answered publically if unsupportive ? - should we take chances on core packages just to give people a chance? - the date for filing #476418 and the date of intend to hijack email But as I think I can only agree with zack in that we disagree, I think I will end it here. /Sune -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: intend to hijack GnuPG
also sprach Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008.04.19.2109 +0100]: I just claimed (and I still do) that there is a process for (possible) MIA maintainers, which doesn't involve the debian-release list. There are better ways to let people know that this is what you think. This debian-release is not the place for your business talk on the channel and the list is very condescending. He was asking debian-release because of the udeb and the general importance of the package. You could have just said that you don't have a problem with a hijack instead of trying to educate him. -- martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/ my experience is that as soon as people are old enough to know better, they don't know anything at all. -- oscar wilde spamtraps: [EMAIL PROTECTED] digital_signature_gpg.asc Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
Re: intend to hijack GnuPG
On 2008-04-19, Josselin Mouette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --=-DjuXQ9s0AhDVtNsDjVrA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Le samedi 19 avril 2008 =E0 07:06 +0200, Laszlo Boszormenyi a =E9crit : I intend to hijack GnuPG[1] It would be very nice to see GnuPG more actively maintained indeed. Yes. But after I have seen Laszlo Boszormenyi bughandling in sqlite3, I think I actually would prefer current maintainance of gnupg. 478980 and 478337 /Sune -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: intend to hijack GnuPG
On Fri, May 02, 2008 at 07:36:25PM +, Sune Vuorela wrote: Yes. But after I have seen Laszlo Boszormenyi bughandling in sqlite3, I think I actually would prefer current maintainance of gnupg. 478980 and 478337 Whatever it might have happened on those 2 bug reports, which I haven't read, I find really annoying your public blaming behaviour. Either step in and offer help or shut up. -- Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ... now what? [EMAIL PROTECTED],cs.unibo.it,debian.org} -%- http://upsilon.cc/zack/ (15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ?/\All one has to do is hit the (15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema\/right keys at the right time signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: intend to hijack GnuPG
Hi, Various people can't reach him[2]. On the other hand, he seems to be active on Ubuntu[3], he joined to Launchpad security this january at least. Moritz Muehlenhoff noted[4] that it should be hijacked and get in shape for Lenny. Thus I have created a preliminary package[5] which fixes some important bugs and get v1.4.9 to the archive. Does the Release Team allow this hijack, should I upload it as an NMU instead or just leave it alone? I think this is a very good initiative. However, I encourage you to setup a collaborative project for this (on Alioth, with repository, mailing-list, etc.). Several people have expressed interest in helping to maintain Gnupg and this is certainly something that should, from the start, be maintained by more than one person. What's the status here? Is there a team being setup, or anybody else working on gnupg? -- Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer GPG Fingerprint: 06C8 C9A2 EAAD E37E 5B2C BE93 067A AD04 C93B FF79 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: intend to hijack GnuPG
On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 01:00:38 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: Various people can't reach him[2]. On the other hand, he seems to be active on Ubuntu[3], he joined to Launchpad security this january at least. Moritz Muehlenhoff noted[4] that it should be hijacked and get in shape for Lenny. Thus I have created a preliminary package[5] which fixes some important bugs and get v1.4.9 to the archive. Does the Release Team allow this hijack, should I upload it as an NMU instead or just leave it alone? I think this is a very good initiative. However, I encourage you to setup a collaborative project for this (on Alioth, with repository, mailing-list, etc.). Several people have expressed interest in helping to maintain Gnupg and this is certainly something that should, from the start, be maintained by more than one person. What's the status here? Is there a team being setup, or anybody else working on gnupg? If a team is being setup, I'd like to be added as well (hanska-guest on Alioth). David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: intend to hijack GnuPG
(moving to -devel as -release is not meant to be a discussion list Please note this is not directed at your post, which was appropriate for -release but my comments are IMHO not. CC'ing you in case you're not subscribed to -devel) Quoting Laszlo Boszormenyi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Various people can't reach him[2]. On the other hand, he seems to be active on Ubuntu[3], he joined to Launchpad security this january at least. Moritz Muehlenhoff noted[4] that it should be hijacked and get in shape for Lenny. Thus I have created a preliminary package[5] which fixes some important bugs and get v1.4.9 to the archive. Does the Release Team allow this hijack, should I upload it as an NMU instead or just leave it alone? I think this is a very good initiative. However, I encourage you to setup a collaborative project for this (on Alioth, with repository, mailing-list, etc.). Several people have expressed interest in helping to maintain Gnupg and this is certainly something that should, from the start, be maintained by more than one person. Of course, please accept my apologies if that was your intent since the beginning...:-) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: intend to hijack GnuPG
x-post, fup2 debian-devel if possible Am Samstag, den 19.04.2008, 09:57 +0200 schrieb Andreas Barth: * Laszlo Boszormenyi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [080419 07:42]: I intend to hijack GnuPG[1], but as it builds an udeb and has priority important, I ask if the Release Team allow it. [..] And, BTW, most of us (including me) have a paid dayjob, and are of course active on that one for the contracted time - for obvious reasons. Telling that I would neglect Debian because I'm spending more time on my dayjob than Debian wouldn't motivate me, and that's probably the same for everyone else. I also have to say that last time I spoke with elmo on IRC, he answered within minutes to me. There are 130(!) open reports and even after taking a quick look at them I found: - several are fixed in newer releases - several are already fixed in the version in Debian - most miss a statement by James (also the one asking for an update) There is no activity and trying to contact him also failed for several people. I'm sorry, but I even cannot imagine, that James is actively maintaining this package (CCed him). However, I would feel a lot better, if he would officially orphan the package in this case, so we don't need a hijack, which has IMHO the potential for bad blood. So, the only on-topic question is: Do we want 1.4.9 in Lenny, I guess, its simply too late, because this package is pretty important. Walking through the list of open bug reports and addressing them will need too much time I guess. But I support a maintainer change and maybe the update can be made in experimental for the moment. Regards, Daniel
Re: intend to hijack GnuPG
[moving to -devel to make Christian happy] On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 09:57:44AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: And, BTW, most of us (including me) have a paid dayjob, and are of course active on that one for the contracted time - for obvious reasons. Telling that I would neglect Debian because I'm spending more time on my dayjob than Debian wouldn't motivate me, and that's probably the same for everyone else. I also have to say that last time I spoke with elmo on IRC, he answered within minutes to me. I don't see how any of that is relevant. If I know I'm going to be too busy to do something, I'm not going to commit to doing it well. I'm not going to commit to doing it at all. If I have the time to do something I've committed to doing and I don't do it because I am unmotivated, that is my issue. It is not Debian's responsibility to motivate me more than anyone else. Certainly the only motivation I should need is the knowledge that I committed to do something and have not rescinded that commitment. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: intend to hijack GnuPG
On Saturday 19 April 2008 22:25:31 Clint Adams wrote:
And, BTW, most of us (including me) have a paid dayjob, and are of
course active on that one for the contracted time - for obvious
reasons. Telling that I would neglect Debian because I'm spending more
time on my dayjob than Debian wouldn't motivate me, and that's
probably the same for everyone else. I also have to say that last time
I spoke with elmo on IRC, he answered within minutes to me.
I don't see how any of that is relevant. If I know I'm going to be too
busy to do something, I'm not going to commit to doing it well. I'm not
going to commit to doing it at all. If I have the time to do something
I've committed to doing and I don't do it because I am unmotivated,
that is my issue. It is not Debian's responsibility to motivate me more
than anyone else. Certainly the only motivation I should need is the
knowledge that I committed to do something and have not rescinded that
commitment.
gnupg is important package. PTS says:
The package is of priority standard or higher, you should really find some
co-maintainers.
Suggestion: Can we replace 'should' with 'must'?
I think James can easily find co-maintainer for it if he is not finding
enough time for it or atleast do RFH.
(thats what I did for festival and some other packages)
--
Cheers,
Kartik Mistry | 0xD1028C8D | IRC: kart_
Blogs: {ftbfs,kartikm}.wordpress.com
Peace be to this house, and all that dwell in it.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: intend to hijack GnuPG
On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 10:37:57PM +0530, Kartik Mistry wrote: gnupg is important package. PTS says: The package is of priority standard or higher, you should really find some co-maintainers. Suggestion: Can we replace 'should' with 'must'? Wrong problem - we don't need more maintainers for packages, we need responsive maintainers who stay on top of things. Chances are that anything you can enforce automatically probably isn't going to deal with that problem. -- You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: intend to hijack GnuPG
* Clint Adams ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [080419 19:00]: [moving to -devel to make Christian happy] On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 09:57:44AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: And, BTW, most of us (including me) have a paid dayjob, and are of course active on that one for the contracted time - for obvious reasons. Telling that I would neglect Debian because I'm spending more time on my dayjob than Debian wouldn't motivate me, and that's probably the same for everyone else. I also have to say that last time I spoke with elmo on IRC, he answered within minutes to me. I don't see how any of that is relevant. I didn't start with oh, elmo is more active in Ubuntu - if nobody would've spoken about that topic, I wouldn't have answered it. Someone has, and I answered it. Cheers, Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: intend to hijack GnuPG
* Daniel Leidert ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [080419 17:51]: x-post, fup2 debian-devel if possible Am Samstag, den 19.04.2008, 09:57 +0200 schrieb Andreas Barth: * Laszlo Boszormenyi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [080419 07:42]: I intend to hijack GnuPG[1], but as it builds an udeb and has priority important, I ask if the Release Team allow it. [..] And, BTW, most of us (including me) have a paid dayjob, and are of course active on that one for the contracted time - for obvious reasons. Telling that I would neglect Debian because I'm spending more time on my dayjob than Debian wouldn't motivate me, and that's probably the same for everyone else. I also have to say that last time I spoke with elmo on IRC, he answered within minutes to me. There are 130(!) open reports and even after taking a quick look at them I found: I never claimed that gnupg is actively maintained (or the opposite). I just claimed (and I still do) that there is a process for (possible) MIA maintainers, which doesn't involve the debian-release list. I also pointed out that comparing activity in the paid dayjob with activity in spare time doesn't really help anything. The correct way to continue this now is not sending lots of bad mails and finger-pointing, but following the process outlined in the developers reference. Cheers, Andi -- http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: intend to hijack GnuPG
Le samedi 19 avril 2008 à 07:06 +0200, Laszlo Boszormenyi a écrit : I intend to hijack GnuPG[1] It would be very nice to see GnuPG more actively maintained indeed. If you prepare an upload of the latest upstream version, it would be nice to synchronize with someone from the GNOME team so that seahorse is uploaded at the same time. Thanks, -- .''`. : :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code. `. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to `-our own. Resistance is futile. signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
