Am Dienstag, den 23.03.2010, 14:55 -0600 schrieb Brian J Mingus: > > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Benjamin Drung <bdr...@ubuntu.com> > wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 23.03.2010, 14:24 -0600 schrieb Brian J > Mingus: > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Elliot Murphy > <ell...@canonical.com> > > wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 2:27 PM, Johan De Taeye > > <johan_de_ta...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > >>>We get far more package submissions than we can > review > > every cycle. I > > >>> generally recommend getting > > >>>your package into Debian and then it will be > sync'ed into > > Ubuntu. There > > >>> are a lot more developers in Debian. > > > But, could this be documented? > > > When people submit their package they know what > they are up > > to. > > > It'ld avoid people (like me) trying to learn the > process, > > uploading their > > > package in good faith and getting (a bit) > frustrated. > > > I fully understand and appreciate all the work the > team is > > doing. > > > Just trying to be positive and see how things can > be > > improved... > > > > > > As Scott has pointed out, it's a problem of having > enough > > volunteers > > to do the work. I am trying to improve the situation > > personally by > > working with Debian teams instead of Ubuntu for my > own > > packages that I > > want to get in, reviewing packages and giving advice > now and > > then on > > REVU, and working towards becoming a MOTU myself, > but it's > > slow going. > > The best way to improve is for more people to do the > same. > > > > Even if you are not yet MOTU, I think one of the > best ways to > > learn is > > to review other peoples packages. I have learned > many things > > to > > improve my own packages by carefully looking at > other peoples > > packages, reading the existing reviews, and trying > to see what > > things > > would need to be fixed before I would consider the > package > > fine to > > upload. Doing code review is a really fantastic way > to learn. > > -- > > Elliot Murphy | https://launchpad.net/~statik/ > > > > > > This really just doesn't click for me. These are Masters of > the > > Universe after all. They know everything about creating > packages and > > they have a highly efficient and streamlined package testing > paradigm. > > They know what bugs in packages are and they know how to fix > them more > > quickly than anyone else. Why is there no one who oversees > the MOTUs > > (Master of the Masters of the Universe) and says "this > package should > > be in Universe" and they say "ok, I will spend the next > couple of > > hours getting it ready." > > > Many MOTUs are busy with updating, syncing, merging packages > and fixing > bugs. Then there is the sponsors queue, which needs love too. > I uploaded > a few package from REVU. There were two ways to get my > attention: Either > someone ask in the #ubuntu-motu channel, when I had time for > it or i > searched the need-packaging bugs on Launchpad. Which package > should I > review? I sorted the need-packaging bugs by affected users and > found > openshot. I think that having a importance indicator would be > a good > idea. What do you think about promoting the use of "Affects me > too" on > Launchpad for that? > > BTW I sponsored only packages, where the packager worked on > getting the > package into Debian, too. > > -- > Benjamin Drung > Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Maintainer > (www.debian.org) > > > In my opinion the decision should be made not based on some advanced > philosophy concerning how many distributions the person tried to get > the package into, but rather the quality of the software and how much > it would improve Ubuntu. After the package gets into Ubuntu almost all > of the work is done for the folks who are experts at porting Ubuntu > packages back into Debian. It should not be the concern of people who > write awesome software and just want to make it available in the > distribution they actually use. The MOTUs have already raised the > standard so high (you must admit there is a lot of prerequisite > knowledge for creating a high quality package) and they are already so > unavailable to provide assistance (meaning folks have to figure it out > themselves) that your Debian requirement can only be considered > completely unreasonable.
I have to admit that the barrier is high to get new packages into Ubuntu and that creating new packages is not the best way to start/learn packaging. There is one concern when uploading a new package: Who maintains the package afterwards? The (unwritten) rule (?) is that the person that did the initial packaging should take care of it. When there is no MOTU using the package and the initial packager disappears, then the package will probably get outdated and buggy. When the initial packagers get their packages into Debian, then they are the maintainers of the packages and they are responsible for them. Therefore it's not only a philosophy concern and not totally unreasonable. > After the package gets into Ubuntu almost all of the work is done for > the folks who are experts at porting Ubuntu packages back into Debian. How many people working on that task and how many Ubuntu packages needs to be ported to Debian? Can we rely on the folks who port Ubuntu packages back into Debian or is this more only a wish? > It should not be the concern of people who write awesome software and > just want to make it available in the distribution they actually use. I agree that people who write awesome software shouldn't be bothered with packaging and all the distribution's processes. In an ideal world there would be a packager that work closely with the upstream developer and do all the packaging. -- Benjamin Drung Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Maintainer (www.debian.org)
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
-- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
