Debian Multimedia Blend
Hi, I'm inspired by the following IRC log to rephrase my mail I recently sended to debian-enterprise list[1]: :) I'm liking this more and more. I would really appreciate it if you could mail us a short introduction to the mailing list Is this the proper list: pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org ?? yes, it is I would like to give an introduction into Debian Pure Blends[2] in the hope that this might be helpful for the Multimedia team. Before I start I would like to mention that I'm a quite uneducated multimedia user - rather somebody who is constantly seeking for the package that might help me in a task I might want to do once per month or so. I started the Debian Med project in 2002 and found a lot of similarities between several user oriented projects (Debian Junior, Debian Edu, Debian Science, Debian Accessibility) to get the idea to technically join those projects via common tools. This effort which is called Debian Pure Blends since 2008 was quite fruitful because each project has developed some technical stuff which somehow turned out to be useful for others as well. My main idea which I outlined at DebConf 7[3] is that we need to introduce a new abstraction level when looking at our package pool: Looking at a single package level you are just lost in the large pool and thus we should rather have a view on package groups which are useful to do certain tasks. This is implemented in so called tasks files which are used as basic source of information in Blends. All currently existing tasks files are in Alioth SVN[4]. The format is described in the Blend doc[2] and also in my talk at MiniDebConf in Berlin[5]. By using the blends-dev package you can easily build metapackages from these tasks files. The so called web sentinel contains user oriented tasks pages which are rendering all interesting information in several languages (as far as there are DDTP translations) including screenshots, popcon, debtags etc. Moreover the tasks pages are featuring "calls for action" for users who might provide DDTP translations easily (hint: a user visiting a page with packages he is interested in is a potentially better translator than a random volunteer who might not necessarily understand the description text) or screenshots for screenshots.debian.net. Moreover there is a developer oriented bugs overview which lists all bugs of packages which are part of the task in question. Same idea as above: A developer who is interested in a certain task might have a good motivation to keep packages of this task clean. If you are interested in the web sentinel I would recommend to have a look at the entry page at Alioth[6]. Just follow some links to tasks and bugs pages. IMHO the application of these tools for Debian Multimedia makes perfectly sense to make users better aware of all the nice packages inside Debian or rather give them a leading hand to guide them trough the jungle of multimedia software in Debian. At least I feel totally lost there and the issue is not important enough for my work to fight through. Because I felt that lost I just tried the usual thing which worked for me in the past with other topics: Build tasks files and use the web sentinel of Blends to get an overview. The result can be seen here[7]. I personally do not know the scope of Debian Multimedia team - my feeling in the BOF was that it is not really about digital imaging but rather audio and video. If this is the case some of the tasks do not really make sense for you and we should probably split these to some (potential) Debian Imaging Blend to not spoil your main target. As I realised in the talk you are prefering group maintenance and to my great pleasure you even managed to join two existing teams. That's really great, because group maintenance of packages is not mandatory in a Blend but it has turned out to be very convenient and I'm convinced that the web sentinel is suporting this. Currently I'm testing some code which sends weekly reminders to Blends mailing lists about packages of the Blend with newer upstream versions available and which have RC bugs. I intend to implement more of these QA tools always based on the set of packages defined in the tasks files. I have a lot more ideas and hope some are useful for enterprise issues as well that I hope that some people of Debian Multimedia might bring in other ideas (ironed out in code ;-)). Thanks for reading up to this point of the long mail - hope this was the longest one I wrote to this list. Kind regards Andreas. [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-enterprise/2010/08/msg6.html [2] http://blends.alioth.debian.org/blends [3] http://people.debian.org/~tille/talks/200706_debconf7_cdd/ (unfortunately the video recording is not available from video archive - I pinged video team) [4] svn://svn.debian.org/svn/blends/projects [5] http://people.debian.org/~tille/talks/201006_minidebconf/ [6] http://blends.alioth.debian.org/ [7] ht
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend
(CCing Andreas because I don't know if you are subscribed) On 07/08/10 14:58, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi, > > I'm inspired by the following IRC log to rephrase my mail I recently > sended to debian-enterprise list[1]: > > :) I'm liking this more and more. I would really appreciate it if > you could mail us a short introduction to the mailing list > Is this the proper list: > pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org ?? > yes, it is > > I would like to give an introduction into Debian Pure Blends[2] in the > hope that this might be helpful for the Multimedia team. As seen on the documentation, there is already a DeMuDi blend. Maybe we can start from there? DeMuDi people were part one of the 2 teams that merged into this one (d-multime...@lists.debian.org). > Before I start > I would like to mention that I'm a quite uneducated multimedia user - > rather somebody who is constantly seeking for the package that might > help me in a task I might want to do once per month or so. > > I started the Debian Med project in 2002 and found a lot of similarities > between several user oriented projects (Debian Junior, Debian Edu, > Debian Science, Debian Accessibility) to get the idea to technically > join those projects via common tools. This effort which is called > Debian Pure Blends since 2008 was quite fruitful because each project > has developed some technical stuff which somehow turned out to be useful > for others as well. > > My main idea which I outlined at DebConf 7[3] is that we need to > introduce a new abstraction level when looking at our package pool: > Looking at a single package level you are just lost in the large pool > and thus we should rather have a view on package groups which are > useful to do certain tasks. This is the part that I find interesting. While maybe metapackages are not what we need now, the basic idea of defining tasks and listing software that might help you with that could be very useful for users. > This is implemented in so called tasks > files which are used as basic source of information in Blends. All > currently existing tasks files are in Alioth SVN[4]. The format is > described in the Blend doc[2] and also in my talk at MiniDebConf in > Berlin[5]. > > By using the blends-dev package you can easily build metapackages from > these tasks files. The so called web sentinel contains user oriented > tasks pages which are rendering all interesting information in several > languages (as far as there are DDTP translations) including > screenshots, popcon, debtags etc. Moreover the tasks pages are > featuring "calls for action" for users who might provide DDTP > translations easily (hint: a user visiting a page with packages he is > interested in is a potentially better translator than a random > volunteer who might not necessarily understand the description text) > or screenshots for screenshots.debian.net. Moreover there is a > developer oriented bugs overview which lists all bugs of packages > which are part of the task in question. Same idea as above: A > developer who is interested in a certain task might have a good > motivation to keep packages of this task clean. > > If you are interested in the web sentinel I would recommend to have a > look at the entry page at Alioth[6]. Just follow some links to tasks > and bugs pages. The current infrastructure requires tasks to live in the blends svn repository (to get the nice webpage shown on debconf, for example)? That would imply that interested people need to join the blends project. Am I correct? > > IMHO the application of these tools for Debian Multimedia makes > perfectly sense to make users better aware of all the nice packages > inside Debian or rather give them a leading hand to guide them > trough the jungle of multimedia software in Debian. At least I > feel totally lost there and the issue is not important enough for > my work to fight through. Because I felt that lost I just tried > the usual thing which worked for me in the past with other topics: > Build tasks files and use the web sentinel of Blends to get an > overview. The result can be seen here[7]. I really like those pages. We just need to polish the tasks files a bit :). > > I personally do not know the scope of Debian Multimedia team - my > feeling in the BOF was that it is not really about digital imaging but > rather audio and video. If this is the case some of the tasks do > not really make sense for you and we should probably split these > to some (potential) Debian Imaging Blend to not spoil your main > target. As mentioned by Reinhardt in the talk, the scope of the team is not clearly established. However, as of now digital imaging seems to be outside of it, and we are more oriented towards audio and video. > > As I realised in the talk you are prefering group maintenance and to my > great pleasure you even managed to join two existing teams. That's > really great, because group maintenance of packages is
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend
On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 11:50:16AM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote: > As seen on the documentation, there is already a DeMuDi blend. Maybe we > can start from there? DeMuDi people were part one of the 2 teams that > merged into this one (d-multime...@lists.debian.org). Thanks for reminding me that the doc is a bit outdated. The DeMuDi Blend idea is quite old and Free was involved into this topic but as far as I know there is no existing technicla implementation. I should fix this in the doc (but perhaps I weit with fixing until the discussion here proceeds to some point). > This is the part that I find interesting. While maybe metapackages are > not what we need now, the basic idea of defining tasks and listing > software that might help you with that could be very useful for users. This is what Debian Accessibility and Debian Enterprise are also thinking and it is perfectly fine. Once reasonable tasks are defined and people think metapackages could be builded anyway everything is prepared - but there is no real need to do it. > The current infrastructure requires tasks to live in the blends svn > repository (to get the nice webpage shown on debconf, for example)? That > would imply that interested people need to join the blends project. Am I > correct? There is no explicit requirement and for instance Debian Edu uses their own SVN. The location of the tasks file can be defined in svn://svn.debian.org/svn/blends/blends/trunk/webtools/webconf for each project. However I would recommend to keep all the tasks files in one place just to enable easier general modifications in case they are needed. DDs do not really join the blends project to get access permissions because the ACLs of the Blends project grant any Debian developer commit permissions. For guests it is not that easy and I would recommend to subscribe the project. > I really like those pages. We just need to polish the tasks files a bit :). Yes, definitely. As I said this was just my uneducated shot on this topic for my on purpose. Feel free to change whatever you think makes sense - I'm keen on learning more about Multimedia by watching your changes. ;-) > As mentioned by Reinhardt in the talk, the scope of the team is not > clearly established. However, as of now digital imaging seems to be > outside of it, and we are more oriented towards audio and video. That's perfectly fine. So I will move any imaging related stuff to some Debian Imaging area which I will keep on maintaining for my own purposes - perhaps some other people will consider this useful and we can start a Blend about this. For the moment it would just blur the Multimeida issue and thus should not be there. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend
[quoting myself in parts] On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 12:01:10PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > > That's perfectly fine. So I will move any imaging related stuff to some > Debian Imaging area which I will keep on maintaining for my own purposes This is just done and the imaging stuff is not any more in multimedia. Moreover I added the activity graph of all multimedia related lists to http://blends.alioth.debian.org/multimedia/ If you do not like this - the source for the index file (which you should probably enhance anyway) is at svn://svn.debian.org/svn/blends/blends/trunk/websites/multimedia Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend
On 09/08/10 06:01, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 11:50:16AM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote: >> As seen on the documentation, there is already a DeMuDi blend. Maybe we >> can start from there? DeMuDi people were part one of the 2 teams that >> merged into this one (d-multime...@lists.debian.org). > > Thanks for reminding me that the doc is a bit outdated. The DeMuDi > Blend idea is quite old and Free was involved into this topic but > as far as I know there is no existing technicla implementation. I > should fix this in the doc (but perhaps I weit with fixing until the > discussion here proceeds to some point). Probably. So, if there was no actual technical work involved, we'll just start from your definitions. > >> The current infrastructure requires tasks to live in the blends svn >> repository (to get the nice webpage shown on debconf, for example)? That >> would imply that interested people need to join the blends project. Am I >> correct? > > There is no explicit requirement and for instance Debian Edu uses their > own SVN. The location of the tasks file can be defined in > > svn://svn.debian.org/svn/blends/blends/trunk/webtools/webconf > > for each project. However I would recommend to keep all the tasks files > in one place just to enable easier general modifications in case they > are needed. DDs do not really join the blends project to get access > permissions because the ACLs of the Blends project grant any Debian > developer commit permissions. For guests it is not that easy and I > would recommend to subscribe the project. Hmm, OK. I'm good then, what about the rest of the team? Anyone else interested? I see in those files that all that is required is the file to live on the same host, so there not even a need to use SVN (we use git on this team). Am I correct? > >> I really like those pages. We just need to polish the tasks files a bit :). > > Yes, definitely. As I said this was just my uneducated shot on this > topic for my on purpose. Feel free to change whatever you think makes > sense - I'm keen on learning more about Multimedia by watching your > changes. ;-) > >> As mentioned by Reinhardt in the talk, the scope of the team is not >> clearly established. However, as of now digital imaging seems to be >> outside of it, and we are more oriented towards audio and video. > > That's perfectly fine. So I will move any imaging related stuff to some > Debian Imaging area which I will keep on maintaining for my own purposes > - perhaps some other people will consider this useful and we can start a > Blend about this. For the moment it would just blur the Multimeida > issue and thus should not be there. OK I see you already did that. So, all that's left now is to actually do some work! -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend
On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 09:26:38AM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote: > Probably. So, if there was no actual technical work involved, we'll just > start from your definitions. OK. > > for each project. However I would recommend to keep all the tasks files > > in one place just to enable easier general modifications in case they > > are needed. DDs do not really join the blends project to get access > > permissions because the ACLs of the Blends project grant any Debian > > developer commit permissions. For guests it is not that easy and I > > would recommend to subscribe the project. > > Hmm, OK. I'm good then, what about the rest of the team? Anyone else > interested? > I see in those files that all that is required is the file to live on > the same host, so there not even a need to use SVN (we use git on this > team). Am I correct? Ahh, sorry no. The script which creates the Blend web sentinel pages is only parsing SVN (there was no reason to support other VCSs because the only tasks files outside the Blend SVN are as well in SVN). So I would suggest to stick to Blends SVN (or provide a patch which obtains the tasks files from git if you regard it as really important). The Blends stuff turned out to be simple enough to not change the used VCS just for the sake of following the crowd to Git. ;-) > > That's perfectly fine. So I will move any imaging related stuff to some > > Debian Imaging area which I will keep on maintaining for my own purposes > > - perhaps some other people will consider this useful and we can start a > > Blend about this. For the moment it would just blur the Multimeida > > issue and thus should not be there. > > OK I see you already did that. So, all that's left now is to actually do > some work! Right, only some work, that's all. ;-)) Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend
Hi Andreas! nice to see you keep pushing Debian Blends :) |--==> On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 12:01:10 +0200, Andreas Tille said: AT> On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 11:50:16AM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote: >>As seen on the documentation, there is already a DeMuDi blend. Maybe we >>can start from there? DeMuDi people were part one of the 2 teams that >>merged into this one (d-multime...@lists.debian.org). AT> Thanks for reminding me that the doc is a bit outdated. The DeMuDi AT> Blend idea is quite old and Free was involved into this topic but AT> as far as I know there is no existing technicla implementation. I AT> should fix this in the doc (but perhaps I weit with fixing until the AT> discussion here proceeds to some point). Yes, the DeMuDi idea is quite old and eventually evolved in the 64 Studio project, which is more a Debian remix/customization than an official Debian Blend. At some point there was an AGNULA/DeMuDi implementation too, but not 100% Debian either. I still like the name "DeMuDi", so if it could be incarnated in some new Blend-based project it would be great :) However I have not enough time to push for that, so if nothing new comes in, feel free to remove it from the docs. Cheers, Free ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 12:59:57PM +0200, Free Ekanayaka wrote: Hi Andreas! nice to see you keep pushing Debian Blends :) |--==> On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 12:01:10 +0200, Andreas Tille |--==> said: AT> On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 11:50:16AM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote: >>As seen on the documentation, there is already a DeMuDi blend. >>Maybe we can start from there? DeMuDi people were part one of the 2 >>teams that merged into this one (d-multime...@lists.debian.org). AT> Thanks for reminding me that the doc is a bit outdated. The AT> DeMuDi Blend idea is quite old and Free was involved into this AT> topic but as far as I know there is no existing technicla AT> implementation. I should fix this in the doc (but perhaps I weit AT> with fixing until the discussion here proceeds to some point). Yes, the DeMuDi idea is quite old and eventually evolved in the 64 Studio project, which is more a Debian remix/customization than an official Debian Blend. At some point there was an AGNULA/DeMuDi implementation too, but not 100% Debian either. I still like the name "DeMuDi", so if it could be incarnated in some new Blend-based project it would be great :) However I have not enough time to push for that, so if nothing new comes in, feel free to remove it from the docs. I like the DeMuDi name too, and see no reason not to keep the name for (some parts of) Blending work in this team. I was not around, however, when deciding on a unified name for this team, so please enlighten me if this is rehashing some old discussion that perhaps is better avoided. :-) - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 12:59:57PM +0200, Free Ekanayaka wrote: > nice to see you keep pushing Debian Blends :) Free, nice to hear from you again! \o/ > Yes, the DeMuDi idea is quite old and eventually evolved in the 64 > Studio project, which is more a Debian remix/customization than an > official Debian Blend. At some point there was an AGNULA/DeMuDi > implementation too, but not 100% Debian either. I still like the name > "DeMuDi", so if it could be incarnated in some new Blend-based project > it would be great :) If you ask me: DeMuDi sounds way cooler than Debian Multimedia (and by the way has the extra advantage that it can not mixed up with debian-multimedia.org which Google tricked me in twice). So I'd be in big favour of DeMuDi (and hope the other way around that this name is not covered by some restrictions which might be remain by the EU-project). > However I have not enough time to push for that, so > if nothing new comes in, feel free to remove it from the docs. Just tell me if I should update the docs and I will do so. BTW, I have another issue: This mailing list recieves a lot of packaging related information which I#m not really interested in. However, de just have this mailinglist debian-multime...@l.d.o. Do you see a chance that we move discussion like this about general project management, Blends stuff, user oriented questions to this mailing list. I was asked to raise the Blends issue here on this list and so did I, but I would prefer if I would not be spammed by bug reports of multimedia packages which I'm simply not interested in. In other projects such split between user oriented list @l.d.o and a maintainer list @a.l.d.o has turned out as quite reasonable. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 02:01:43PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: BTW, I have another issue: This mailing list recieves a lot of packaging related information which I#m not really interested in. However, de just have this mailinglist debian-multime...@l.d.o. Do you see a chance that we move discussion like this about general project management, Blends stuff, user oriented questions to this mailing list. I was asked to raise the Blends issue here on this list and so did I, but I would prefer if I would not be spammed by bug reports of multimedia packages which I'm simply not interested in. In other projects such split between user oriented list @l.d.o and a maintainer list @a.l.d.o has turned out as quite reasonable. Often at Alioth, teams have one list for general development discussions (also being used for the Maintainer: field in packages), and a separate one for VCS commits - which most but (as is clear here) not all would then subscribe to as well. I like this split. But as mentioned recently already, I am relatively new here, so perhaps there are sane reasons for not doing this too? - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend
Hey, |--==> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:01:43 +0200, Andreas Tille said: AT> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 12:59:57PM +0200, Free Ekanayaka wrote: >>nice to see you keep pushing Debian Blends :) AT> Free, nice to hear from you again! \o/ Same here! :) >>Yes, the DeMuDi idea is quite old and eventually evolved in the 64 >>Studio project, which is more a Debian remix/customization than an >>official Debian Blend. At some point there was an AGNULA/DeMuDi >>implementation too, but not 100% Debian either. I still like the name >>"DeMuDi", so if it could be incarnated in some new Blend-based project >>it would be great :) AT> If you ask me: DeMuDi sounds way cooler than Debian Multimedia (and by AT> the way has the extra advantage that it can not mixed up with AT> debian-multimedia.org which Google tricked me in twice). So I'd be AT> in big favour of DeMuDi (and hope the other way around that this name AT> is not covered by some restrictions which might be remain by the AT> EU-project). As far as I know the name "AGNULA" is a trademark owned by the EC, however "DeMuDi" per-se it's not, so it should be fine to use. >>However I have not enough time to push for that, so >>if nothing new comes in, feel free to remove it from the docs. AT> Just tell me if I should update the docs and I will do so. I guess it depends if somebody on this list has interest in pushing this forward, if not maybe it could be marked as "dormant" or something? Cheers, Free ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 02:37:15PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 02:01:43PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: BTW, I have another issue: This mailing list recieves a lot of packaging related information which I#m not really interested in. However, de just have this mailinglist debian-multime...@l.d.o. Do you see a chance that we move discussion like this about general project management, Blends stuff, user oriented questions to this mailing list. I was asked to raise the Blends issue here on this list and so did I, but I would prefer if I would not be spammed by bug reports of multimedia packages which I'm simply not interested in. In other projects such split between user oriented list @l.d.o and a maintainer list @a.l.d.o has turned out as quite reasonable. Often at Alioth, teams have one list for general development discussions (also being used for the Maintainer: field in packages), and a separate one for VCS commits - which most but (as is clear here) not all would then subscribe to as well. I like this split. But as mentioned recently already, I am relatively new here, so perhaps there are sane reasons for not doing this too? Initally I misunderstood the pproposal, so let me clarify my stand: I find it appropriate with 2 lists, one for development and one for the more noisy machine-generated VCS messages. In other words, I dislike the idea of separating e.g. technical and non-technical discussions of the human conversations in separate lists. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend
On Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 16:17:34 (CET), Felipe Sateler wrote: > On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 11:36, Andreas Tille wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 08:34:38PM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: >>> Since we need to advertise this list, I think we should do a Bits From >>> our team. I have started a draft in >>> http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia/BitsFrom, so please add >>> anything you think we should be saying. >> >> That's a really good idea. I have enhanced the Blends paragraph a bit. >> Once this bits are published I probably will unsubscribe the packaging >> list (so please at least CC me in Blends related subjects) and subscribe >> rather the general list. > > Please, people, add whatever you think is important to the above wiki > page. In particular, I think the consumer side needs some real info in > there. Maybe Reinhardt or Fabian can add something there? All other > people are encouraged to add their view on what we have done too! I've now added/improved the notes regarding ffmpeg/mplayer. VDPAU should work, but I cannot test myself. link [1] on that page is currently broken! -- Gruesse/greetings, Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4 ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 02:44, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > On Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 16:17:34 (CET), Felipe Sateler wrote: > >> On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 11:36, Andreas Tille wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 08:34:38PM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: Since we need to advertise this list, I think we should do a Bits From our team. I have started a draft in http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia/BitsFrom, so please add anything you think we should be saying. >>> >>> That's a really good idea. I have enhanced the Blends paragraph a bit. >>> Once this bits are published I probably will unsubscribe the packaging >>> list (so please at least CC me in Blends related subjects) and subscribe >>> rather the general list. >> >> Please, people, add whatever you think is important to the above wiki >> page. In particular, I think the consumer side needs some real info in >> there. Maybe Reinhardt or Fabian can add something there? All other >> people are encouraged to add their view on what we have done too! > > I've now added/improved the notes regarding ffmpeg/mplayer. VDPAU should > work, but I cannot test myself. Great. > > link [1] on that page is currently broken! Fixed. -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Debian Multimedia Blend (Was: Defining interesting multimedia tasks)
Hi,
I'm trying to come back to a thread about a Multimedia Blend which was
started in August this year[1]. There was some discussion but no obvios
action. Yesterday I was able to do at least a bit of action *I* feel
able to do (and I do not feel able for the other parts). I try to
remember you hereby to some kind of todo list / somehow agreed upon
actions to bring the idea of a Debian Multimedia Blend foreward.
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 12:01:30PM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> > well spent. In the Blends approach we had done much efforts to maintain
> > lists of packages manually and all of them (explicitely those who were
> > Wiki based) just failed. It takes you much time to create such lists
> > and finally you will fail to keep them up to date. Thus we invented the
> > tasks pages including the long version (see example for Debian
> > Multimedia[1]) which was inspired by Ubuntu Wiki style. If you are
> > missing some information on the tasks pages please make some suggestions
> > what should be added (and how it should display).
>
> Well, the most obvious pieces of information missing are a) what version
> of the package is included in lenny and squeeze, and b) link to the
> package documentation.
The first missing piece of information ( a) versions in Lenny and
Squeeze) is solved now (see [2]). I agree that the layout is not nice -
it is just a prove that it was quite easy to do (about 15 lines of
code). The reason why I did not spend more effort in the layout is:
1) The long list of packages is rarely used by other Blends and Multimedia
has not shown enough interest to make me highly motivated to spend more
time.
2) It's quite simple to do for anybody, just change the template which
is available here[3].
I think a tabular design like
Package ShortdescriptionVersion Lenny Version Squeeze
woul be reasonable.
> the ubuntu help wiki implements b) by linking to the upstream online
> user manual or similar if available.
As I explained we just need to store this information somehow and as I
wrote in my previous response to this mail[4] (which remained unanswered
in mail as well as action) the solution I can see for this problem is
upstream-metadata.yaml[5]. If the information is *really* important for
you and you *really* want it to see it on the packages list of a
potential Multimedia Blend - just agree upon a fieldname (UpstreamDoc
comes to mind) and feed it into a debian/upstream-metadata.yaml in each
package which provides such information (remember: there is NO need for
uploading a package with this information - the file just needs to be
in packaging VCS).
Further problems discussed but unsolved (in no specific order):
1. Mailing list
I suggested to use debian-multime...@lists.debian.org as general
discussion list (for instance for discussion like this) for a Debian
Multimedia Blend and for an entry point of users to talk to the
package developers. This list has turned out to be a good success
in other Blends.
The reason to not to do so was that this list is used as packaging
list of DeMudi packages.
List Archive of August: 8 mails
List Archive of September: 1 SPAM mail
List Archive of October: 1 mail
In short: The mailing list is de facto free and really using it
might be a way to actively be notified about packages which are not
yet moved under pkg-multimedia-maintainers maintenance.
2. The name
I'm in strong favour of DeMuDi because it is catchy and might be
known.
3. The tasks
We had also a discussion about reasonable tasks[6]. I hereby want to
stress that my proposed task definitions[7] which are rendered here[8]
for a better overview are simply a suggestion of an uneducated multimedia
outsider. They are probably not very practical - but it is a task for
a multimedia expert and it should be *done* (not only discussed). If
you ask me, it should be done *before* Squeeze release. Even if we
will probably not able to release metapackages (we did not even decided
whether we want them at all - see below) - we can mention DeMuDi in the
release notes of Squeeze anyway. If not - we are simlpy missing a chance
to get attention of a wide public.
4. Metapackages
I'm in favour of creating metapackages because they have certain advantages
and they at least do not harm. Those who do not like this stuff will not
install it - that's fine.
5. Debtags
The DebTags technique should be used more heavily in Blends (see for
instance
[9]). I do not mind what comes first: Designing Debtags for multimedia
packages and proper debtagging for *all* relevant packages or defining
tasks, putting the packages in and use the tasks pages for enabling proper
DebTagging. IMHO the latter
separate discussion and development lists (was: Debian Multimedia Blend)
On 13/08/10 08:01, Andreas Tille wrote: > BTW, I have another issue: This mailing list recieves a lot of > packaging related information which I#m not really interested in. > However, de just have this mailinglist debian-multime...@l.d.o. Do you > see a chance that we move discussion like this about general project > management, Blends stuff, user oriented questions to this mailing > list. I was asked to raise the Blends issue here on this list and > so did I, but I would prefer if I would not be spammed by bug reports > of multimedia packages which I'm simply not interested in. In other > projects such split between user oriented list @l.d.o and a maintainer > list @a.l.d.o has turned out as quite reasonable. > Well, this was discussed at the time of the merge between the two teams. Basically, we decided to have everything on the alioth list because we feared the traffic was so small we would dilute the interest. Perhaps the time has come to rethink this? -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend (Was: Defining interesting multimedia tasks)
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 04:51, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to come back to a thread about a Multimedia Blend which was > started in August this year[1]. There was some discussion but no obvios > action. Yesterday I was able to do at least a bit of action *I* feel > able to do (and I do not feel able for the other parts). I try to > remember you hereby to some kind of todo list / somehow agreed upon > actions to bring the idea of a Debian Multimedia Blend foreward. I'm sorry about the lack of action, but I've had very little time since this discussion was started. > > On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 12:01:30PM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote: >> > well spent. In the Blends approach we had done much efforts to maintain >> > lists of packages manually and all of them (explicitely those who were >> > Wiki based) just failed. It takes you much time to create such lists >> > and finally you will fail to keep them up to date. Thus we invented the >> > tasks pages including the long version (see example for Debian >> > Multimedia[1]) which was inspired by Ubuntu Wiki style. If you are >> > missing some information on the tasks pages please make some suggestions >> > what should be added (and how it should display). >> >> Well, the most obvious pieces of information missing are a) what version >> of the package is included in lenny and squeeze, and b) link to the >> package documentation. > > The first missing piece of information ( a) versions in Lenny and > Squeeze) is solved now (see [2]). I agree that the layout is not nice - > it is just a prove that it was quite easy to do (about 15 lines of > code). The reason why I did not spend more effort in the layout is: > 1) The long list of packages is rarely used by other Blends and Multimedia > has not shown enough interest to make me highly motivated to spend more > time. I apologise again for having forgotten about this discussion. > 2) It's quite simple to do for anybody, just change the template which > is available here[3]. > I think a tabular design like > > Package Shortdescription Version Lenny Version > Squeeze > > > woul be reasonable. > >> the ubuntu help wiki implements b) by linking to the upstream online >> user manual or similar if available. > > As I explained we just need to store this information somehow and as I > wrote in my previous response to this mail[4] (which remained unanswered > in mail as well as action) the solution I can see for this problem is > upstream-metadata.yaml[5]. If the information is *really* important for > you and you *really* want it to see it on the packages list of a > potential Multimedia Blend - just agree upon a fieldname (UpstreamDoc > comes to mind) and feed it into a debian/upstream-metadata.yaml in each > package which provides such information (remember: there is NO need for > uploading a package with this information - the file just needs to be > in packaging VCS). I find the blends approach much better than the wiki approach. > > Further problems discussed but unsolved (in no specific order): > > 1. Mailing list > I suggested to use debian-multime...@lists.debian.org as general > discussion list (for instance for discussion like this) for a Debian > Multimedia Blend and for an entry point of users to talk to the > package developers. This list has turned out to be a good success > in other Blends. > The reason to not to do so was that this list is used as packaging > list of DeMudi packages. > List Archive of August: 8 mails > List Archive of September: 1 SPAM mail > List Archive of October: 1 mail > In short: The mailing list is de facto free and really using it > might be a way to actively be notified about packages which are not > yet moved under pkg-multimedia-maintainers maintenance. So far Jonas is (I believe) the only one who opposes this split. I'm in favor, and if we do this we should announce it to devel-announce and -announce so that we can get some users there. What do others think? > > 2. The name > I'm in strong favour of DeMuDi because it is catchy and might be > known. This is the name for the blend? If so, I agree cannibalizing the DeMuDi name might be good. > > 3. The tasks > We had also a discussion about reasonable tasks[6]. I hereby want to > stress that my proposed task definitions[7] which are rendered here[8] > for a better overview are simply a suggestion of an uneducated multimedia > outsider. They are probably not very practical - but it is a task for > a multimedia expert and it should be *do
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend (Was: Defining interesting multimedia tasks)
[Quick answere from Hotel in Sevillia] On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 02:16:12PM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: > > I apologise again for having forgotten about this discussion. No problem - thanks for taking action now. > > potential Multimedia Blend - just agree upon a fieldname (UpstreamDoc > > comes to mind) and feed it into a debian/upstream-metadata.yaml in each > > package which provides such information (remember: there is NO need for > > uploading a package with this information - the file just needs to be > > in packaging VCS). > > I find the blends approach much better than the wiki approach. Me too. ;-) Using upstream-metadata.yaml would make sense in any case. > > In short: The mailing list is de facto free and really using it > > might be a way to actively be notified about packages which are not > > yet moved under pkg-multimedia-maintainers maintenance. > > So far Jonas is (I believe) the only one who opposes this split. I'm > in favor, and if we do this we should announce it to devel-announce > and -announce so that we can get some users there. What do others > think? Whatever we decide: We should announce in any case the result. > > 2. The name > > I'm in strong favour of DeMuDi because it is catchy and might be > > known. > > This is the name for the blend? If so, I agree cannibalizing the > DeMuDi name might be good. Yes. IMHO it was suggested by Free as name for the Blend in a past thread. > I wholeheartedly agree with this. I will try to start modifying the > tasks (they are a good base). > I've added a new task, hopefully others can help too (I think we have > too many, maybe we should merge some of them). I'm perfectly fine with any change you might do on the tasks layout. The changes become effect on the tasks pages after the cron run (one per day). > I don't really care much about debtags. They are inconsistent, little > used and even less policed. While this probably describes the current state I think DebTags are a good idea anyway. If a Blends would be able to help for better DebTags design this would be a good side effect. > There is at least one commit that is not by you now :p Great! Thanks for working on this Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend (Was: Defining interesting multimedia tasks)
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 02:16:12PM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 04:51, Andreas Tille wrote: 1. Mailing list I suggested to use debian-multime...@lists.debian.org as general discussion list (for instance for discussion like this) for a Debian Multimedia Blend and for an entry point of users to talk to the package developers. This list has turned out to be a good success in other Blends. The reason to not to do so was that this list is used as packaging list of DeMudi packages. List Archive of August: 8 mails List Archive of September: 1 SPAM mail List Archive of October: 1 mail In short: The mailing list is de facto free and really using it might be a way to actively be notified about packages which are not yet moved under pkg-multimedia-maintainers maintenance. So far Jonas is (I believe) the only one who opposes this split. I'm in favor, and if we do this we should announce it to devel-announce and -announce so that we can get some users there. What do others think? Hmm. Now that I reflect on it again, I am not so strongly against it, actually. I see the point of better serving our users, but cannot help being sceptical still - so please help convince me: Bugreports have been mentioned as an example of inappropriate mails for such list, right? So what is then on-topic? Is it for visions and metadesign - like a multimedia-specific d-project@ ? Or is it more of a d-user-multimedia@ list? When we (apparently) lack the time already to do the technical work we would like to, then where should the ressources come from to manage and care for such a list? Or do we simply provide the space and leave the Multimedia users to discuss with themselves? 5. Debtags The DebTags technique should be used more heavily in Blends (see for instance [9]). I do not mind what comes first: Designing Debtags for multimedia packages and proper debtagging for *all* relevant packages or defining tasks, putting the packages in and use the tasks pages for enabling proper DebTagging. IMHO the latter approach is more simple and can be easier done. Once the DebTagging is done properly we might be able to decide about means how to create tasks from DebTags. In any case we have to *do* something - nothing comes from sit and wait. I don't really care much about debtags. They are inconsistent, little used and even less policed. I am a debtags fan. Time will tell if I manage to back that up with action. Exactly because it is (deliberately) vaguely policed, I guess there's no need for consensus on its use - those of us believing in its potential can simply start tagging to improve its usability :-) Anyone interested but uncertain where to begin, please speak up, and I'd be happy to try explain how it works. NB! There is absolutely no need to be a programmer or a Debian Developer to help improve debtags tagging! Regards, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend (Was: Defining interesting multimedia tasks)
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 19:58, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 02:16:12PM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: >> >> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 04:51, Andreas Tille wrote: >>> >>> 1. Mailing list >>> I suggested to use debian-multime...@lists.debian.org as general >>> discussion list (for instance for discussion like this) for a Debian >>> Multimedia Blend and for an entry point of users to talk to the package >>> developers. This list has turned out to be a good success in other >>> Blends. >>> The reason to not to do so was that this list is used as >>> packaging list of DeMudi packages. >>> List Archive of August: 8 mails >>> List Archive of September: 1 SPAM mail >>> List Archive of October: 1 mail >>> In short: The mailing list is de facto free and really using it >>> might be a way to actively be notified about packages which are >>> not yet moved under pkg-multimedia-maintainers maintenance. >> >> So far Jonas is (I believe) the only one who opposes this split. I'm in >> favor, and if we do this we should announce it to devel-announce and >> -announce so that we can get some users there. What do others think? > > Hmm. Now that I reflect on it again, I am not so strongly against it, > actually. I see the point of better serving our users, but cannot help > being sceptical still - so please help convince me: > > Bugreports have been mentioned as an example of inappropriate mails for such > list, right? So what is then on-topic? Is it for visions and metadesign - > like a multimedia-specific d-project@ ? Or is it more of a > d-user-multimedia@ list? I would think of it more of a d-user-multimedia type of list than d-project. > > When we (apparently) lack the time already to do the technical work we would > like to, then where should the ressources come from to manage and care for > such a list? Or do we simply provide the space and leave the Multimedia > users to discuss with themselves? I would try to chip in when possible (it is much easier to answer a quick email than actually do work :p). But I would expect that, if there are multimedia users out there, soon they will start helping each other there. -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend (Was: Defining interesting multimedia tasks)
Hi all, shortly: On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Andreas Tille wrote: > 1. Mailing list > I suggested to use debian-multime...@lists.debian.org as general > discussion list (for instance for discussion like this) for a Debian > Multimedia Blend and for an entry point of users to talk to the > package developers. This list has turned out to be a good success > in other Blends. > The reason to not to do so was that this list is used as packaging > list of DeMudi packages. > List Archive of August: 8 mails > List Archive of September: 1 SPAM mail > List Archive of October: 1 mail > In short: The mailing list is de facto free and really using it > might be a way to actively be notified about packages which are not > yet moved under pkg-multimedia-maintainers maintenance. +1 to the 'merge' action. > 2. The name > I'm in strong favour of DeMuDi because it is catchy and might be > known. +1 > 3. The tasks > We had also a discussion about reasonable tasks[6]. I hereby want to > stress that my proposed task definitions[7] which are rendered here[8] > for a better overview are simply a suggestion of an uneducated multimedia > outsider. They are probably not very practical - but it is a task for > a multimedia expert and it should be *done* (not only discussed). If > you ask me, it should be done *before* Squeeze release. Even if we > will probably not able to release metapackages (we did not even decided > whether we want them at all - see below) - we can mention DeMuDi in the > release notes of Squeeze anyway. If not - we are simlpy missing a chance > to get attention of a wide public. I already had a look and will try to adjusting them, there is something I'd like to change. > 4. Metapackages > I'm in favour of creating metapackages because they have certain > advantages > and they at least do not harm. I agree, +1 to this too. > 5. Debtags > The DebTags technique should be used more heavily in Blends (see for > instance > [9]). I do not mind what comes first: Designing Debtags for multimedia > packages and proper debtagging for *all* relevant packages or defining > tasks, putting the packages in and use the tasks pages for enabling proper > DebTagging. IMHO the latter approach is more simple and can be easier > done. Once the DebTagging is done properly we might be able to decide > about means how to create tasks from DebTags. In any case we have to *do* > something - nothing comes from sit and wait. I agree, again, and I think the second approach should be fine. -- Alessio Treglia Debian & Ubuntu Developer | Homepage: http://www.alessiotreglia.com 0FEC 59A5 E18E E04F 6D40 593B 45D4 8C7C DCFC 3FD0 ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend (Was: Defining interesting multimedia tasks)
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:12:47PM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: > > Bugreports have been mentioned as an example of inappropriate mails for such > > list, right? So what is then on-topic? Is it for visions and metadesign - > > like a multimedia-specific d-project@ ? Or is it more of a > > d-user-multimedia@ list? > > I would think of it more of a d-user-multimedia type of list than d-project. In Debian Med we have such a list which is open for user problems. It is a good idea to involve users into discussion about tasks layout. Also the list is a good entry point for future developers who are just seeking a first contact. The main issue is to form a community around the multimedia topic inside Debian. Sometimes you can not predict what mails such a list might see. > > When we (apparently) lack the time already to do the technical work we would > > like to, then where should the ressources come from to manage and care for > > such a list? Or do we simply provide the space and leave the Multimedia > > users to discuss with themselves? > > I would try to chip in when possible (it is much easier to answer a > quick email than actually do work :p). But I would expect that, if > there are multimedia users out there, soon they will start helping > each other there. +1 Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend (Was: Defining interesting multimedia tasks)
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 18:20, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:12:47PM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: >> > Bugreports have been mentioned as an example of inappropriate mails for >> > such >> > list, right? So what is then on-topic? Is it for visions and metadesign - >> > like a multimedia-specific d-project@ ? Or is it more of a >> > d-user-multimedia@ list? >> >> I would think of it more of a d-user-multimedia type of list than d-project. > > In Debian Med we have such a list which is open for user problems. It > is a good idea to involve users into discussion about tasks layout. > Also the list is a good entry point for future developers who are just > seeking a first contact. The main issue is to form a community around > the multimedia topic inside Debian. Sometimes you can not predict what > mails such a list might see. Since we need to advertise this list, I think we should do a Bits From our team. I have started a draft in http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia/BitsFrom, so please add anything you think we should be saying. -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend (Was: Defining interesting multimedia tasks)
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 08:34:38PM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: > Since we need to advertise this list, I think we should do a Bits From > our team. I have started a draft in > http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia/BitsFrom, so please add > anything you think we should be saying. That's a really good idea. I have enhanced the Blends paragraph a bit. Once this bits are published I probably will unsubscribe the packaging list (so please at least CC me in Blends related subjects) and subscribe rather the general list. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Debian Multimedia Blend (Was: Defining interesting multimedia tasks)
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 11:36, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 08:34:38PM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: >> Since we need to advertise this list, I think we should do a Bits From >> our team. I have started a draft in >> http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia/BitsFrom, so please add >> anything you think we should be saying. > > That's a really good idea. I have enhanced the Blends paragraph a bit. > Once this bits are published I probably will unsubscribe the packaging > list (so please at least CC me in Blends related subjects) and subscribe > rather the general list. Please, people, add whatever you think is important to the above wiki page. In particular, I think the consumer side needs some real info in there. Maybe Reinhardt or Fabian can add something there? All other people are encouraged to add their view on what we have done too! -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: separate discussion and development lists (was: Debian Multimedia Blend)
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 12:01:43PM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote: On 13/08/10 08:01, Andreas Tille wrote: BTW, I have another issue: This mailing list recieves a lot of packaging related information which I#m not really interested in. However, de just have this mailinglist debian-multime...@l.d.o. Do you see a chance that we move discussion like this about general project management, Blends stuff, user oriented questions to this mailing list. I was asked to raise the Blends issue here on this list and so did I, but I would prefer if I would not be spammed by bug reports of multimedia packages which I'm simply not interested in. In other projects such split between user oriented list @l.d.o and a maintainer list @a.l.d.o has turned out as quite reasonable. Well, this was discussed at the time of the merge between the two teams. Basically, we decided to have everything on the alioth list because we feared the traffic was so small we would dilute the interest. Perhaps the time has come to rethink this? As I see it we now do not discuss opening up another communication channel but (re)using an old "brand" when marketing (some or all of) what we produce. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
