Hi Steve, On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 07:44, Steve Langasek <[email protected]> wrote: > [last response to this thread for the moment; sorry for the flood :)]
at least we revamp this ml :) > On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 11:17:22PM +0200, Sandro Tosi wrote: >> > Who is in Uploaders versus Maintainers doesn't make a >> > lot of difference. If you'd be happier if we rearranged the names, I >> > doubt it >> > would be a problem. > >> I doubt it won't... and you completely skipped the most important >> part, let me requote it: "Sure, and doko took part in exactly zero >> discussions". This is the Problem we want to solve, not it's not >> solved and it won't be without a strong action. > > I'm a little unclear on what you're saying here, because if your goal is to > get Matthias to participate in Python discussions, unseating him as the > Python maintainer against his will is pretty obviously not going to change > that. I was just stating that in the discussions happening during the last months, Matthias didn't participate in any of them. Please consider that except for python*-default, he is still the sole maintainer for all the python interpreter packages, so there's no-one else able to speak in his behalf when something touching python "core" is discussed but him. Please also note that before the appeal, he announced the py2.4 fadeout and py2.6 as default transition completely uncoordinated and undiscussed with debian-python, that then happened to have done all the work for them. This time we were lucky there were people working on it, can we bet also for the next transition? :) > Do you mean that it's a problem for anyone who does not participate > in discussions on debian-python to be an uploader / co-maintainer of the > python packages? If that's what you mean, can you please explain why you > think that's an appropriate standard to set? Not exactly, but I expect to see new python co-maintainers as someone that already worked with the debian-python community, so I that showed interest on either IRC or debian-python ml, that's not shy about express his thoughts/ideas in public, listening to suggestions, critics and comments. > If there's a maintenance team that inclues some members who handle the tasks > of communicating with the broader community, and some members who prefer to > avoid mailing list discussions - for whatever reason - and instead work on > the technical bits behind the scenes, and everyone within that team is happy > with the arrangement, why should anyone else care if a single member within > that team doesn't communicate? I'm not that happy about silent team members (you can always have the impression of them doing nothing / avoiding discussion for some unexpressed reasons, such as those that lead us to this appeal) but if the other co-maints are fine with it, that's their business. For sure, I think we should avoid to have a PR sub-team that simply forward the community questions to the non-PR sub-team for tech replies and then be forwarded in public. I can see where you want to go, I *hope* you are right and it will work, but my doubts still holds. Regards, -- Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu) My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
