On 2019, ഓഗസ്റ്റ് 15 1:33:42 PM IST, Jonas Smedegaard <jo...@jones.dk> wrote: >Quoting Pirate Praveen (2019-08-15 08:18:01) >> >> >> On 2019, ഓഗസ്റ്റ് 14 11:05:03 PM IST, Jonas Smedegaard >> <jo...@jones.dk <mailto:jo...@jones.dk>> wrote: >> > Quoting Pirate Praveen (2019-08-14 19:08:47) >> >> Hi ruby and js teams, >> >> >> >> task_list project [1] provides both ruby and nodejs code from the >> > same >> >> repo. Currently only ruby-task-list binary package is created. I >> > added >> >> a new binary package node-deckar01-task-list for the nodejs code, > >> >> but >> > >> >> it was rejected by ftp masters [2]. >> > >> > Did you quote ftpmaster in full in that referenced post written by >> > you? >> >> Yes. >> >> > >> >> They think we should not add a new binary package for this case >> >> and instead should use a Provides field and a single binary >> >> package. >> > >> > Do they? In what you reference above I only see Ftpmaster saying >> > "We've talked about this." which can frankly mean a lot of >different >> > things. >> >> I agree, that is why I asked them to state their position clearly, >> first on irc, then on BTS. I even shared the BTS link on irc while we > >> were discussing. >> >> This was before the second rejection. On second rejection, I again >> asked them to reply on the bug. Do you have any other suggestion to >> get an official statement from them? > >Can you quote the conversation on irc? > >Can you quote the first rejection? > >Basically, can you quote whatever it is that ftpmaster refers to as the > >"talk" you've already had with them?
Thanks to matrix providing a built in browser (saving all the history), I could find the logs searching by the bug number. You can see it from a matrix client, https://matrix.to/#/!saEdMDOolDMHFHsdhS:matrix.org/$15495421281854XktcP:poddery.com I have to copy each message from riot separately. Here it is, Me: please review node-autoprefixer, it adds libjs-autoprefixer binary required to replace embedded copy of autoprefixer.js in ruby-autoprefixer-rails waldi: Pirate Praveen: you have been asked to not do that me: waldi: this time there is a valid reason unlike the previous cases waldi: Pirate Praveen: no. nodejs as dependency is no reason me: waldi: I'd like to ask this as an official statement from ftp team and I'd like to challenge it with CTTE should I open a bug agianst ftp.debian.org? ScottK: Pirate Praveen: CTTE can't overrule FTP team. The only way to overrule a delegate is GR. Just so you know what you're in for. Gannef, and yes, open a bug. highvoltage: Pirate Praveen: fwiw, I know that that path will take you nowhere, the ftp teams's advice here is sound and upwards of 99% of DDs will agree with their judgement here, it's going to be futile to fight it, I suggest you rather find a better solution for the package, that's a better way to spend your (and everybody elses) energy me: highvoltage: fine, at least let this be on record highvoltage: policy is quite clear on it and there's even an entire wiki page on the topic (https://wiki.debian.org/EmbeddedCodeCopies), I guess if you need further records on that, then that's your business waldi: highvoltage: it's not about code copies. but about adding additional binary packages just to avoid one dependency me: Ganneff: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=921628 highvoltage: ew that's even worse Clint: ... Gannef: it does sound like a plenty bad idea And some more... > >> >> I don't agree with their decision, but the only option I have to >> >> challenege it is a GR. >> > >> > You mean you have already tried the route of going to the technical > >> > committee, and asking for the opinion of the DPL? Or am I missing >> > something making those options a no-go? >> >> FTP masters made it clear that CTTE cannot override a delegate on >irc. >> I have seen confirmation from CTTE members for the same on another >> issue about browserified JavaScript and dfsg. [1] >> >> "You seem to be asking us to decide on DFSG compliance (in place of >> the FTP Team); but it's not at all clear that the constitution >enables >> the TC to override Delegates or decisions made by delegates (see >> §6.1)." >> >> Same for DPL, a DPL cannot override a delegate. > >My suggestion is not to try override a decision. > >What you do here on this mailinglist is, I believe, to try discuss what > >to do about a decision made by ftpmaster. > >My suggestion is try discuss that with the DPL ot the Tech-CTTE. Thanks, I have mailed DPL about it. I will also talk to Tech-CTTE. >...unless it is clear to you what to do about the decision from >ftpmaster? As you have not presented us other details than your _own_ >reflections I cannot really have any sensible opinion about their >decision. I have quoted the full logs in this email. > >> > Whichever options available, I think it would be helpful with the >> > opinions of stakeholders more clearly laid out - i.e. more than >> > quoting >> > >> > ftpmasters for saying "We've talked about this." and you taking >> > responsibility for explaining what that's supposed to mean. >> > >> > >> I agree, it is not a situation I like to be in as well. I asked >> multiple times using multiple forums (email, irc and BTS) for ftp >> master to officially state their policy, but none worked. With ftp >> master refusing to even provide a statement or rationale for the >> decision, it seems GR is the only option. I could still ask CTTE for >> their opinion as it can help in case of a GR. But I wanted to first >> check with the affected teams what they think before going to CTTE or > >> GR. > >There is a difference between ftpmaster making a decision, talking >about >a decision, and providing a policy. > >I can certainly understand how ftpmaster is _very_ reluctant to provide > >policies - i.e. expectations for future decisions. > >Regardless of my opinion, if you want to discuss ftpmaster _policies_ >with this team or any other body I again recommend to present not only >your side of the story but (verbatim!) ftpmaster side of the story as >well! Done now. > > - Jonas -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.