Hi Dmitrij, First of all thank you for picking up the maintenance of this package. It is non-trivial.
On 01/06/12 01:57, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: > Hi Dmitrijs, > > I'd like to thank you for your care for the 'autofs' package > but please excuse me for expressing my non-appreciation of your NMU. > I have cancelled it due to bug that Jakub Wilk expressed. > Although perhaps not fast enough we're working on 'autofs' - we have a > team of three and a different fix to the problem is already committed > to repository. > The changelog entry says: " * declare myself as Maintainer (adopting package)" And the control says, that there is one maintainer & one uploader. Please, either change the maintainer to a team, or list all people on the team. Please, set Vcs-* fields as per: http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/best-pkging-practices.html#bpp-vcs If the fix has been committed to Vcs-*, you should set the 'pending' tag on the bug. Correct Vcs-* headers, together with the pending tag would allowed me to find the patches I was looking for. > I do believe the pressure you impose with your NMU is unnecessary > because simply asking or sharing your suggestions in email to any of > us would be better. > True. I'm sorry for putting you in the spotlight. We are days away from the freeze, the package has RC bugs and did not transition to testing yet. I do not want to release wheezy without autofs. There is pressure from the release team. > Friendly discussion is always preferable to aggressive pushing of your > implementation over the shoulders of active maintainers who at least > trying to discuss changes between themselves. > From the changelog, I understood that there was only one maintainer who did ample of work to update the package. RC http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=673796 has no response from maintainer. Do you have a patch committed to some private Vcs repository? RC http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=674391 has no response from maintainer. And you say you do have a patch ready. Who sponsored your upload? Because bug #674391 is Fail To Build From Source (in a sane manner) filed the day after the upload. Autoconf was last updated on 2012-05-12. Did the package FTBFS (in a sane manner) on the upload? > Also I'm sure you're aware that I'm not a DD, so to override your NMU > I must complete changes for new release and find a sponsor within 5 > days only. > I am aware that you are not a DD. To cancel an NMU you only need to get any DD to 'sponsor' this one line: "dcut ftp-eu cancel autofs_5.0.6-1.1_amd64.changes" Nobody is forcing you to complete changes for a new release in an unreasonable quick amount of time. I am sure anyone from #debian-mentors would have done it, if it was not already done by me. Do you have a DD in your team of three people to review and sponsor packages? > You're welcome to the team if you want to help but please consider > first to communicate whatever improvements you might have and then > perhaps sponsor the existing effort rather than override it with > premature NMU. > Yes, I do want to be part of the team. Do you have a team setup on alioth with a Vcs repository and mailing list? Or do you want help to set this up? Improvements I want to achieve: This package to migrate to testing. This means: * fix FTBFS in a sane way * fix FTBFS with gold / ld --as-needed * fix conf file upgrade handling > Meanwhile I'll do my best to address the problem ASAP. > Great. * Please comment on the bugs that are being worked on. * Please attach the patch to the BTS or point to VCS where this patch is available. * Please tag pending, if a solution for the bug is found and it will be part of the next upload. Above action, would have prevented spending me time doing duplicate work in a different time zone. > Thank you. > Thank you for you contributions to debian. I hope you will keep up the excellent work you are doing with this package. But please do fix the issues with the package I have outlined above. -- Regards, Dmitrijs.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
