Re: Are Martin and Sam's platforms equivalent?

On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 12:40:45PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > I hesitate to bang this drum again, but this would be a great place to > think about how we can use git more. > > Ideally, our default sponsorship workflow would *not involve source > packages or orig tarballs at all*. It's too easy t

Re: Are Martin and Sam's platforms equivalent?

Sean Whitton writes ("Re: Are Martin and Sam's platforms equivalent?"): > On Fri 29 Mar 2019 at 04:43PM +02, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > 2. Package sponsorship ... > > There are too few people reviewing packages at sponsorship-requests, > > but proper and timely revi

Re: Are Martin and Sam's platforms equivalent?

On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 6:11 AM Sean Whitton wrote: > Fair enough, thanks. I don't look at QA summaries opportunistically, so > I see why we'd have different impressions in this area. I wonder if folks are using how-can-i-help, that reports sponsorship requests for packages you have installed the

Re: Are Martin and Sam's platforms equivalent?

On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 3:05 AM Sean Whitton wrote: > If I have relevant expertise or experience to improve Debian in some > particular respect (e.g. fixing bugs in a packages written in a > particular programming language that isn't so commonly used), I have > strong reason to use my time to deplo

Re: Are Martin and Sam's platforms equivalent?

Hello, On Sun 31 Mar 2019 at 09:46PM +02, Jonathan Carter wrote: > Well, maybe you and I just fundamentally disagree on this one then. My > point was that if only 10 more DD's each took care of one more > sponsorship request of the last month, we'd now basically efficiently > have no backlog. As

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

Hi Alex, Alexander Wirt: >>> And I tested hyperkitty some time ago with our archive and it was >>> unusable slow. >> >> Interesting. I wonder how Fedora deals with this. I haven't used their >> archives extensively, but from quick tests it appeared to be quite >> responsive. > > One question that

Re: Are Martin and Sam's platforms equivalent?

Hi Sean On 2019/03/31 21:05, Sean Whitton wrote: > On Sat 30 Mar 2019 at 10:23AM +02, Jonathan Carter wrote: >> That leaves less than 10 packages that need reviewing right now. I do >> think that reviewing/sponsoring should be a lot better, and that more >> DDs should play their part, and that our

Re: Are Martin and Sam's platforms equivalent?

Hello Jonathan, On Sat 30 Mar 2019 at 10:23AM +02, Jonathan Carter wrote: > That leaves less than 10 packages that need reviewing right now. I do > think that reviewing/sponsoring should be a lot better, and that more > DDs should play their part, and that our tooling can improve to bring > more

Re: Are Martin and Sam's platforms equivalent?

On 2019/03/30 00:16, Sean Whitton wrote: > On Fri 29 Mar 2019 at 04:43PM +02, Adrian Bunk wrote: >> 2. Package sponsorship >> Any mentoring outreach aimed at finding new contributors should start >> with no longer frustrating the people who have already started to >> contribute. They might stop t

Re: Are Martin and Sam's platforms equivalent?

Hello, On Fri 29 Mar 2019 at 04:43PM +02, Adrian Bunk wrote: > 1. Non-DDs getting single changes into Debian > If you are not a DD, there is no process to get a change into > Debian if the maintainer is MIA or is one of those maintainers > who ignores the BTS and only uploads new upstream version

Re: Are Martin and Sam's platforms equivalent?

On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 07:06:26PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote: > > "Jose" == Jose Miguel Parrella writes: > > Jose> The question is _what_ would be up for discussion, given it's > Jose> only a year. > > In the discussions here, three items have come up that resonate with me > significa

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

On Wed, 27 Mar 2019, Jonas Meurer wrote: > Hi Alex, > > Alexander Wirt: > > On Tue, 26 Mar 2019, Jonas Meurer wrote: > >> Alexander Wirt: > >>> In my experience as a former mailman admin and listadmin mailman is a > >>> no-go. > >>> Getting our feature set even nearly into mailman is impossible,

Re: Are Martin and Sam's platforms equivalent?

to be, but when it comes to culture I think there are parallels in terms of what needs to change. That's what I was referring to in my rebuttal. > It's also clear there's a different approach to money and resources > in the two platforms. Yes. -- Martin Michlmayr https://www.cyrius.com/

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

On 3/26/19 7:07 PM, Jonas Meurer wrote: Hi Alex, Alexander Wirt: On Tue, 26 Mar 2019, Jonas Meurer wrote: Alexander Wirt: In my experience as a former mailman admin and listadmin mailman is a no-go. Getting our feature set even nearly into mailman is impossible, takes years and will just get

Re: Are Martin and Sam's platforms equivalent?

an's governance doesn't need to change significantly, while the way Debian operates does. I suspect Martin and I do disagree some here, especially around degreee and on how well Debian is working today. I'm just not sure the text you point to is a good example of that disagreement.

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

Hi Alex, Alexander Wirt: > On Tue, 26 Mar 2019, Jonas Meurer wrote: >> Alexander Wirt: >>> In my experience as a former mailman admin and listadmin mailman is a >>> no-go. >>> Getting our feature set even nearly into mailman is impossible, takes years >>> and will just get us an unmaintainable thi

Are Martin and Sam's platforms equivalent?

cant changes in governance required" while Martin mentions "change" 9 times, including: "I think Debian has reached a point where it's important to fundamentally rethink how our community operates" It's also clear there's a different approach to money and

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

On 19-03-25 12 h 54, Ansgar wrote: > a lot of communication in Debian happens over IRC. However IRC is not > as nice to use as newer alternatives, creating a barrier for newer > contributors. The way I see it, IRC is a barrier for new contributors, but there are ways to make IRC more accessible:

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

On 3/26/19 9:32 AM, Ansgar wrote: > Both Mattermost and Rocket.chat are centralized services. This means > users have to create a Debian-specific account and might have to keep a > Debian-specific instance of the client running (if the client doesn't > support logging into multiple accounts at the

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

On 2019/03/26 10:32, Ansgar wrote: > What makes Matrix interesting for me is that it is federated and that > there is a client ecosystem developing[1]. > > I might be interested in trying to get a Matrix homeserver for > debian.org as an experimental service. Need to investigate what this > needs

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

Paulo Henrique de Lima Santana writes: > On 3/25/19 3:42 PM, Jonathan Carter wrote: >> There's a massive amount of interesting things happening in the space. >> Matrix is good, but Mattermost is certainly worth looking at as well. >> >> https://mattermost.com/ [...] > There is also Rocket.chat. >

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

On Tue, 26 Mar 2019, Jonas Meurer wrote: > Hi Alex, > > Alexander Wirt: > >> While I agree that some "more modern" going way would be nice for lists, > >> I don't think that is an easy task. Nor one where DPL can do much > >> (unless listmasters need some resources that DPL can approve for such a

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

On 2019/03/26 04:09, Paulo Henrique de Lima Santana wrote: > There is also Rocket.chat. > https://rocket.chat/ Not really the place for me to rant about rocketchat, but I've used and supported it before and wasn't impressed with its quality, it's one of those node.js spaghetti cases and if prese

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

On 2019/03/25 22:27, Laura Arjona Reina wrote: >> More on Mastodon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastodon_(software) >> Follow me on Mastodon! :) https://mastodon.xyz/@highvoltage >> > > Debian is already in Mastodon (which federates with GNU Social): > > https://fosstodon.org/@debian > > (it's

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

Hi, On 3/25/19 3:42 PM, Jonathan Carter wrote: > > There's a massive amount of interesting things happening in the space. > Matrix is good, but Mattermost is certainly worth looking at as well. > > https://mattermost.com/ > > It's a free software alternative to Slack, but it's not a mere copy,

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

Hi Alex, Alexander Wirt: >> While I agree that some "more modern" going way would be nice for lists, >> I don't think that is an easy task. Nor one where DPL can do much >> (unless listmasters need some resources that DPL can approve for such a >> change). Its up to the listmasters, though as far

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

On Mon, 25 Mar 2019, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > On 15352 March 1977, ans...@debian.org wrote: > > > Do you think Debian should be more active to establish (official) > > presence on newer platforms? > > For those that are free, sure. > > > In particular I als

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

On 15352 March 1977, ans...@debian.org wrote: Do you think Debian should be more active to establish (official) presence on newer platforms? For those that are free, sure. In particular I also wonder if Debian should look at Matrix[1]: it is a free and decentralized platform, and the UI (of

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

Ansgar writes: > As a simple test I tried to join #debian over the bridge. It doesn't > work out of the box as #debian need registered nicks. > > Figuring out how to register a nickname on OFTC over the Matrix bridge > and having to do that before joining a channel is a pretty high barrier. Thi

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

Hi El 25/3/19 a las 19:42, Jonathan Carter escribió: > > Here are some of them many of you may already be familiar with. > > 1. Mastodon > > Mastodon is a twitter-like platform with a tweetdeck-like interface. > > More on Mastodon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastodon_(software) > Follow me

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

Quoting Jonathan Carter (2019-03-25 20:20:11) > Hi Martin > > On 2019/03/25 21:16, martin f krafft wrote: > > And while surely not representative: 11 out of 12 teams I personally > > know who looked at Matrix and Mattermost a couple of years back and > > went with Mattermost then are now migrati

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

Quoting "John Paul Adrian Glaubitz", who wrote on 2019-03-25 at 20:23 Uhr +0100: Does Matrix allow a client to be idling on some server to act as a bouncer? There's matrix-ircd, which is in theory a client that acts as an IRCd. I write "in theory" because it's abandonware. But otherwise with

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

Hi Martin On 2019/03/25 21:16, martin f krafft wrote: > Quoting "Jonathan Carter", who wrote on 2019-03-25 at 20:42 Uhr +0200: >> It's a free software alternative to Slack, but it's not a mere copy, >> Mattermost is a superset of Slack in terms of features. Mattermost >> integrates with many diffe

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

martin f krafft writes: > Quoting "Sam Hartman", who wrote on 2019-03-25 at 13:09 Uhr -0400: >> I've been looking at Matrix too and it seems kind of nice. There >> already seem to be a number of channels related to Debian (or >> gatewayed from oftc) on Matrix. > > One benefit of Matrix is that ther

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

On 3/25/19 8:16 PM, martin f krafft wrote: > Yes, I am a huge Matrix evangelist. And why wouldn't I? Does Matrix allow a client to be idling on some server to act as a bouncer? I usually run Weechat on a server and never log off. Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Devel

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

Quoting "Jonathan Carter", who wrote on 2019-03-25 at 20:42 Uhr +0200: It's a free software alternative to Slack, but it's not a mere copy, Mattermost is a superset of Slack in terms of features. Mattermost integrates with many different existing services. In particular, it also integrates real

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

Quoting "Sam Hartman", who wrote on 2019-03-25 at 13:09 Uhr -0400: I've been looking at Matrix too and it seems kind of nice. There already seem to be a number of channels related to Debian (or gatewayed from oftc) on Matrix. One benefit of Matrix is that there are a lot of bridges, and the I

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

presence on newer platforms? > > A disadvantage is splitting the community, but I'm not sure keeping IRC > forever as the world moves on is a good option either... > > In particular I also wonder if Debian should look at Matrix[1]: it is a > free and decentralized pla

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms

an should be more active to establish Ansgar> (official) presence on newer platforms? I've been looking at Matrix too and it seems kind of nice. There already seem to be a number of channels related to Debian (or gatewayed from oftc) on Matrix. I think that we're still in the i

Debian presence on newer platforms

Hi, a lot of communication in Debian happens over IRC. However IRC is not as nice to use as newer alternatives, creating a barrier for newer contributors. Do you think Debian should be more active to establish (official) presence on newer platforms? A disadvantage is splitting the community

Re: A few high level questions for all platforms

Hi JMP On 2019/03/20 03:43, Jose Miguel Parrella wrote: > * As a DPL, what steps would you take (if any) towards reducing the > workload and breadth of activities the DPL is expected to engage in? Chris's "bits from the dpl" were more frequent and comprehensive than previous DPLs, and the good co

Re: A few high level questions for all platforms

Hi Martin On 2019/03/20 19:38, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > * Jonathan Carter [2019-03-20 18:57]: >>> Not right now, although my ideas of spending Debian's money might >>> trigger some GRs. > > [ I should point that your quote removes a smiley from my sentence and > that smiley was significant. ]

Re: A few high level questions for all platforms

* Jonathan Carter [2019-03-20 18:57]: > > Not right now, although my ideas of spending Debian's money might > > trigger some GRs. [ I should point that your quote removes a smiley from my sentence and that smiley was significant. ] > Your platform doesn't provide much details on that, although y

Re: A few high level questions for all platforms

Hi Martin On 2019/03/20 17:11, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > Not right now, although my ideas of spending Debian's money might > trigger some GRs. Your platform doesn't provide much details on that, although you do mention grants and paid-for Debian work. Do you mind expanding on your spending idea

Re: A few high level questions for all platforms

> "Jose" == Jose Miguel Parrella writes: Jose> If DPL Team/Committee worked, and delegations start to feel Jose> more permanent (delegated functions make sense, terms are Jose> long) then why wouldn't a few of those delegates become Debian Jose> Leadership Team members alongsi

Re: A few high level questions for all platforms

* Jose Miguel Parrella [2019-03-19 18:43]: > * As a DPL, what steps would you take (if any) towards reducing the > workload and breadth of activities the DPL is expected to engage in? I intend to make use of the delegations process (maybe I'll even create some new roles) and if elected I'd like t

Re: A few high level questions for all platforms

On 15347 March 1977, Michael Meskes wrote: But yes, depending on/with some events/companies, speaking as a DPL will be perceived much more strongly. Any "normal" DD won't be heard. If that is the case, and if its sufficient, a delegation can be good. Are you saying you would delegate the role

Re: A few high level questions for all platforms

Thanks for taking the time to go through this and other people's questions, Sam. On 3/20/19 3:04 AM, Sam Hartman wrote: > I've been kind of confused by all the discussions of changing our > governance to permit this. The constitution is quite flexible in this > area already. > There are a couple

Re: A few high level questions for all platforms

> But yes, depending on/with some events/companies, speaking as a DPL > will > be perceived much more strongly. Any "normal" DD won't be heard. If > that > is the case, and if its sufficient, a delegation can be good. > Are you saying you would delegate the role of making-presentations-as- DPL? Or

Re: A few high level questions for all platforms

o you Jose> plan to implement such a concept in the next year? If so, how? Yes. I plan to ask people to help me and then empower them to do so. One thing I'm doing is looking at the other candidate platforms and thinking about how aligned their ideas are and whether I could get some of

Re: A few high level questions for all platforms

On 15347 March 1977, Jose Miguel Parrella wrote: * As a DPL, what steps would you take (if any) towards reducing the workload and breadth of activities the DPL is expected to engage in? Depending on the actual activity and there being any volunteers, it may get delegated. * Would you pursue

A few high level questions for all platforms

Thank you to all of the candidates for your nominations [0] and for sharing your early vision for the next year (and looking forward to Simon's) I would like to formulate a few questions not aimed to any platform in particular. I expect some candidates will point me to their platform page and othe

Platforms.

Hi Wouter, Hi Charles, I'm still waiting for your platforms. I would have liked to publish them last Friday, and already postponed it to today. If I don't receive them by tomorrow around this hour I will start to publish the others that I did receive. I'm also going to postpo

Debian Project Leader Elections 2007: Availability of platforms

Hi, The platforms for andidates are now available, and linked in from the main vote page at: http://www.debian.org/vote/2007/vote_001 The plan is for the rebuttals to be posted on march 5th, to leave plenty of time for people to read about the candidates before the DPL

Platforms for the candidates published

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, The platforms for the candidates have been published, and are accessible from http://www.debian.org/vote/2003/vote_0001 I would like to keep to the schedule and publish the rebuttals this Friday 2003/02/21, as initially

Platforms for the candidates published

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, The platforms for the candidates have been published, and are accessible from http://www.debian.org/vote/2003/vote_0001 I would like to keep to the schedule and publish the rebuttals this Friday 2003/02/21, as initially

Re: Status on publishing platforms

On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 11:05:03AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > And now, I'm told, Manoj has three, leaving me the hold up. ...not anymore. -- G. Branden Robinson| The Rehnquist Court has never Debian GNU/Linux | encountered a criminal statute it [EM

Re: Status on publishing platforms

On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 11:05:03AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > And now, I'm told, Manoj has three, leaving me the hold up. ...not anymore. -- G. Branden Robinson| The Rehnquist Court has never Debian GNU/Linux | encountered a criminal statute it [EM

Re: Status on publishing platforms

On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 04:19:28PM -0600, Debian Project Secretary wrote: > I apologize for the delay in publishing the Project Leader > platforms. They have not yet been put up on vote.debian.org, since I > have received only two of the four candidate platforms to date. I > s

Re: Status on publishing platforms

On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 04:19:28PM -0600, Debian Project Secretary wrote: > I apologize for the delay in publishing the Project Leader > platforms. They have not yet been put up on vote.debian.org, since I > have received only two of the four candidate platforms to date. I > s

Status on publishing platforms

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi folks, I apologize for the delay in publishing the Project Leader platforms. They have not yet been put up on vote.debian.org, since I have received only two of the four candidate platforms to date. I strongly urge the remaining

Status on publishing platforms

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi folks, I apologize for the delay in publishing the Project Leader platforms. They have not yet been put up on vote.debian.org, since I have received only two of the four candidate platforms to date. I strongly urge the remaining

Re: Rebuttals appended to candidate platforms

On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 03:28:02PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > For the record, I'll note that I'm much, much more efficient writing > emails than HTML. *cough* Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signe

Re: Rebuttals appended to candidate platforms

On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 03:28:02PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > For the record, I'll note that I'm much, much more efficient writing > emails than HTML. *cough* Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG sign

Re: Rebuttals appended to candidate platforms

On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 12:12:44AM -0600, Debian Project Secretary wrote: > 5 days late, rebuttals have bee4n appended to the platforms of > candidates who submitted rebuttals. I apologize for the delay. Belatedly, here is mine: http://people.debian.org/~branden/platform+rebutta

Re: Rebuttals appended to candidate platforms

On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 12:12:44AM -0600, Debian Project Secretary wrote: > 5 days late, rebuttals have bee4n appended to the platforms of > candidates who submitted rebuttals. I apologize for the delay. Belatedly, here is mine: http://people.debian.org/~branden/platform+rebutta

Re: Rebuttals appended to candidate platforms

On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 12:12:44AM -0600, Debian Project Secretary wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi, > > 5 days late, rebuttals have bee4n appended to the platforms of > candidates who submitted rebuttals. I apologize for the delay.

Re: Rebuttals appended to candidate platforms

On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 12:12:44AM -0600, Debian Project Secretary wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi, > > 5 days late, rebuttals have bee4n appended to the platforms of > candidates who submitted rebuttals. I apologize for the delay.

Rebuttals appended to candidate platforms

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, 5 days late, rebuttals have bee4n appended to the platforms of candidates who submitted rebuttals. I apologize for the delay. manoj - -- Might as well be frank, monsieur. It would take a miracle to get you out of Casablanca

Rebuttals appended to candidate platforms

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, 5 days late, rebuttals have bee4n appended to the platforms of candidates who submitted rebuttals. I apologize for the delay. manoj - -- Might as well be frank, monsieur. It would take a miracle to get you out of Casablanca

Re: Debian Project Leader Election 2002: Platforms

Debian Project Secretary wrote: > Hi Folks, > > All the candidate platforms are now in, and have been uploaded > to my home dir on cvs.debian.org. Soon, some kindly folks from > debian-www shall take this tarball, unpack it into the correct place > in the wml t

Re: Debian Project Leader Election 2002: Platforms

Debian Project Secretary wrote: > Hi Folks, > > All the candidate platforms are now in, and have been uploaded > to my home dir on cvs.debian.org. Soon, some kindly folks from > debian-www shall take this tarball, unpack it into the correct place > in the wml t

Debian Project Leader Election 2002: Platforms

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Folks, All the candidate platforms are now in, and have been uploaded to my home dir on cvs.debian.org. Soon, some kindly folks from debian-www shall take this tarball, unpack it into the correct place in the wml tree, and it should

Debian Project Leader Election 2002: Platforms

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Folks, All the candidate platforms are now in, and have been uploaded to my home dir on cvs.debian.org. Soon, some kindly folks from debian-www shall take this tarball, unpack it into the correct place in the wml tree, and it should

Debian Leader Election: Publishing platforms

the candidates enough time to craft their platforms, I should think. The format of the web page is open to discussion, but I suggest there be at least three sections: a) Introduction/Biography b) Major Goal/ Meat of the platform, c) Rebuttal. After the publication, there share be a

Debian Leader Election: Publishing platforms

the candidates enough time to craft their platforms, I should think. The format of the web page is open to discussion, but I suggest there be at least three sections: a) Introduction/Biography b) Major Goal/ Meat of the platform, c) Rebuttal. After the publication, there share be a