Steve Langasek wrote: > FWIW, here's what I see in practice. We have Ubuntu saying that they > give back to Debian; and then we have a fairly large divergence > between what Debian has in unstable and what's going into the next > Ubuntu release, with IME very little patch submission to the Debian > BTS, plus particular individuals who are working diligently to make > sure their own Ubuntu changes get integrated effectively into Debian.
I don't think that patches-submitted-to-the-BTS is a good way to measure how much Ubuntu is contributing to Debian. Ubuntu's patches are readily available: http://people.ubuntulinux.org/~scott/patches/ If they were submitted to the BTS then that would just create more work for the Debian maintainer as well as for the Ubuntu maintainer, since the former would have to tag the report and ensure it gets closed on the next upload, etc. Yes, it might be more helpful than the current breakdown of patches into "changelog" and "packaging" components if there was a further breakdown into parts suitable for Debian and parts not suitable for Debian. However, to perform this breakdown would be for Ubuntu developers to make judgments about what is suitable for Debian, and I am sure that such judgments would provoke negative reactions from Debian developers. So I think that it is up to Debian maintainers to review the Ubuntu patches from time to time and to backport what appears to be suitable for Debian. I agree that it would be nice if Ubuntu developers tried to get their changes into sid. It is certainly not their responsibility to do so, but in my experience Ubuntu developers have been very cooperative when they have been approached. So I don't see a big problem. -- Thomas Hood -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]