Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
Cyril Brulebois writes (Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)): Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk (26/07/2012): Uploaders needs to be abolished in favour of multiple Maintainers. In wheezy perhaps ? I'm pretty sure the answer is no. Uh, yes. I miswrote. I'd intended wheezy+1. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20498.35938.892096.94...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
Jon Dowland writes (Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)): On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 12:15:15AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: We are in the process of discussing a variety of constitutional amendments to be raised by the tech-ctte that will hopefully end up creating a sort of bundle of constitutional fixes to vote on. Perhaps it would be good to include in that a terminology standardization on member for the places in the constitution that we refer to voting project members rather than specifically people who upload software. Yes please! I am not in favour of this change. The point about a Debian Developer is that the basis of their claim to the rights and responsibilities enumerated in the constitution, is that they help develop Debian. I don't think the word Developer implies that one can't develop Debian in other ways than by directly editing software. The word member is very weak and suggests that anyone might simply choose to join and become a member. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20497.15914.424101.736...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 01:55:06PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
Jon Dowland writes (Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to
mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs
conflict)):
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 12:15:15AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
We are in the process of discussing a variety of constitutional amendments
to be raised by the tech-ctte that will hopefully end up creating a sort
of bundle of constitutional fixes to vote on. Perhaps it would be good to
include in that a terminology standardization on member for the places in
the constitution that we refer to voting project members rather than
specifically people who upload software.
Yes please!
I am not in favour of this change. The point about a Debian Developer
is that the basis of their claim to the rights and responsibilities
enumerated in the constitution, is that they help develop Debian.
I don't think the word Developer implies that one can't develop
Debian in other ways than by directly editing software.
The problem to solve is not that Developer implies a *limitation* of
responsibity for Developers; it's that non-packaging contributions are
not considered to carry the same value or esteem as traditional packaging.
I agree that 'developer' is a fine word to describe a valued contributor
to the project and does not — on its own — suggest packaging software,
but sadly the historical context does.
I'm not overly interested in the word developer being eradicated, but at
the very least having some consistency in Debian's documents would be
very welcome. ('New Maintainer' → route to 'Developer' vs. 'Debian
Maintainer' is another area of confusion). Perhaps an entirely new set
of nouns should be chosen, free of historical baggage?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120726130545.GB14409@debian
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 01:55:06PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: We are in the process of discussing a variety of constitutional amendments to be raised by the tech-ctte that will hopefully end up creating a sort of bundle of constitutional fixes to vote on. Perhaps it would be good to include in that a terminology standardization on member for the places in the constitution that we refer to voting project members rather than specifically people who upload software. Yes please! I am not in favour of this change. The point about a Debian Developer is that the basis of their claim to the rights and responsibilities enumerated in the constitution, is that they help develop Debian. Not only Debian Developers help develop Debian. -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
Jon Dowland writes (Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to
mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)):
I'm not overly interested in the word developer being eradicated, but at
the very least having some consistency in Debian's documents would be
very welcome. ('New Maintainer' → route to 'Developer' vs. 'Debian
Maintainer' is another area of confusion). Perhaps an entirely new set
of nouns should be chosen, free of historical baggage?
Heh, like that's going to work in Debian. What we could do though is
try harder to use the nouns we do have more consistently.
I think we have these:
Developer, DD
As per the constitution; includes non-uploading DDs.
New Maintainer needs to be renamed to New Developer.
[Non-]Uploading Developer
To distinguish where necessary, but usually we can use
Sponsor instead.
Sponsor
An uploading DD signing off on another package.
Maintainer, package maintainer, package maintainer
Someone in the Maintainer or Uploaders field.
Uploaders needs to be abolished in favour of multiple
Maintainers. In wheezy perhaps ?
DM, Debian Maintainer
Someone in the DM keyring. This may need renaming.
In the meantime we need to never write Debian maintainer
to mean maintainer of a Debian package.
User
Might be a DD or DM or Maintainer too of course.
Submitter
Someone who filed a bug. Might be zero or more of the above.
We also need a general word for someone involved with Debian in a
positive way. Participant is clumsy; member of the community
even more so. Person might do but word with a more positive spin
would be nice.
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/20497.17962.240142.849...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
Andrey Rahmatullin writes (Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)): On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 01:55:06PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: I am not in favour of this change. The point about a Debian Developer is that the basis of their claim to the rights and responsibilities enumerated in the constitution, is that they help develop Debian. Not only Debian Developers help develop Debian. This is true. But it is Debian Developers whose contributions have been formally recognised by the project. We could come up with a longer name like Governing Developer or something but it would be clumsy. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20497.18051.452209.880...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
On 2012-07-26 14:29:14 +0100 (+0100), Ian Jackson wrote:
[...]
We also need a general word for someone involved with Debian in a
positive way. Participant is clumsy; member of the community
even more so. Person might do but word with a more positive spin
would be nice.
As a long-time participant and non-DD, I've always liked the term
contributor in that context.
--
{ IRL(Jeremy_Stanley); WWW(http://fungi.yuggoth.org/); PGP(43495829);
WHOIS(STANL3-ARIN); SMTP(fu...@yuggoth.org); FINGER(fu...@yuggoth.org);
MUD(kin...@katarsis.mudpy.org:6669); IRC(fu...@irc.yuggoth.org#ccl); }
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120726133700.gl3...@yuggoth.org
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
On 07/26/2012 08:37 AM, The Fungi wrote: On 2012-07-26 14:29:14 +0100 (+0100), Ian Jackson wrote: [...] We also need a general word for someone involved with Debian in a positive way. Participant is clumsy; member of the community even more so. Person might do but word with a more positive spin would be nice. As a long-time participant and non-DD, I've always liked the term contributor in that context. Although it is likely to not stay this way forever, this is exactly how I describe my participation - Debian Contributor -- Kind regards, Michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/501149b5.3020...@pbandjelly.org
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
Hi, On Donnerstag, 26. Juli 2012, Ian Jackson wrote: Heh, like that's going to work in Debian. What we could do though is try harder to use the nouns we do have more consistently. Heh, like that's going to work in Debian. ;-) Actually I do think introducing new _and better/good_ terms works, salvaging a package IMHO is an example for that. cheers, Holger -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201207261632.27280.hol...@layer-acht.org
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
On 07/26/2012 03:29 PM, Ian Jackson wrote: Developer, DD As per the constitution; includes non-uploading DDs. New Maintainer needs to be renamed to New Developer. [Non-]Uploading Developer To distinguish where necessary, but usually we can use Sponsor instead. Sponsor An uploading DD signing off on another package. Maintainer, package maintainer, package maintainer Someone in the Maintainer or Uploaders field. Uploaders needs to be abolished in favour of multiple Maintainers. In wheezy perhaps ? DM, Debian Maintainer Someone in the DM keyring. This may need renaming. In the meantime we need to never write Debian maintainer to mean maintainer of a Debian package. User Might be a DD or DM or Maintainer too of course. Submitter Someone who filed a bug. Might be zero or more of the above. We also need a general word for someone involved with Debian in a positive way. Participant is clumsy; member of the community even more so. Person might do but word with a more positive spin would be nice. Contributor? Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5011764a.2040...@debian.org
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 18:54 +0200, Luk Claes wrote: On 07/26/2012 03:29 PM, Ian Jackson wrote: ... We also need a general word for someone involved with Debian in a positive way. Participant is clumsy; member of the community even more so. Person might do but word with a more positive spin would be nice. Contributor? That's a good name, I happen to be in that state myself currently. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1343334466.16717.137.camel@x60
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk (26/07/2012): Uploaders needs to be abolished in favour of multiple Maintainers. In wheezy perhaps ? I'm pretty sure the answer is no. Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 06:00:21PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: Yes, as the new wording is logically inconsistent. *By definition* a Debian Project Member, as the term is being used here, is someone who has voting rights. The term Debian Developer was being used to distinguish between project members who upload and those who do not. I'm not convinced there's consensus on that terminology. Our constitution does not talk about project members, and instead uses the word developer. It would be really good if we could avoid a terminology ambiguity proliferation about this. -- I wrote a book on personal productivity: http://gtdfh.branchable.com/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 07:49:06AM +0100, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
Our constitution does not talk about project members, and instead uses
the word developer.
In fact, the Constitution uses interchangeably member and developer.
(And that is one of the basis for the slow shift towards member in
places like nm.d.o and elsewhere. It is correct to do so, constitution
wise, and it exerts less communication emphasis on the activity of
[technical] development.)
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences .. http://upsilon.cc/zack .. . . o
Debian Project Leader... @zack on identi.ca ...o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org writes: On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 07:49:06AM +0100, Lars Wirzenius wrote: Our constitution does not talk about project members, and instead uses the word developer. In fact, the Constitution uses interchangeably member and developer. (And that is one of the basis for the slow shift towards member in places like nm.d.o and elsewhere. It is correct to do so, constitution wise, and it exerts less communication emphasis on the activity of [technical] development.) We are in the process of discussing a variety of constitutional amendments to be raised by the tech-ctte that will hopefully end up creating a sort of bundle of constitutional fixes to vote on. Perhaps it would be good to include in that a terminology standardization on member for the places in the constitution that we refer to voting project members rather than specifically people who upload software. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/871uk0gvlo@windlord.stanford.edu
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 12:15:15AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org writes: On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 07:49:06AM +0100, Lars Wirzenius wrote: Our constitution does not talk about project members, and instead uses the word developer. In fact, the Constitution uses interchangeably member and developer. Ah, indeed. It does use member in a couple of places, a quick grep reveals me. We are in the process of discussing a variety of constitutional amendments to be raised by the tech-ctte that will hopefully end up creating a sort of bundle of constitutional fixes to vote on. Perhaps it would be good to include in that a terminology standardization on member for the places in the constitution that we refer to voting project members rather than specifically people who upload software. Yes please. Personally I don't think we need separate terms for voting member with uploading rights and those without such rights; in the few cases where the difference matters, it's easier (I think also better) to spell it out rather than having yet another Debian specific term. But we can discuss that when the issue comes up on -vote. -- I wrote a book on personal productivity: http://gtdfh.branchable.com/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
Le Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 08:20:47AM +0100, Lars Wirzenius a écrit : Personally I don't think we need separate terms for voting member with uploading rights and those without such rights; in the few cases where the difference matters, it's easier (I think also better) to spell it out rather than having yet another Debian specific term. Hi all, I think that the discussions for the Project membership procedures and Debian project members GRs showed that a significant number of Debian Developers do not agree with the idea of using different titles for the project members according to if they have upload rights or not. The Project membership procedures GR effectively blocked such a proposition and the Debian project members GR faced some opposition until it was amended to not introduce the term of Debian Contributors. Unless there are new arguments justificating such a split, I think that it would be unproductive to propose again what has been rejected twice. In that sense, I think that the wiki pages http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper and http://wiki.debian.org/DebianProjectMember are quite misleading, and should be corrected, or deleted if they are abandonned drafts. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120725073715.gc27...@falafel.plessy.net
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 06:00:21PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: Yes, as the new wording is logically inconsistent. *By definition* a Debian Project Member, as the term is being used here, is someone who has voting rights. The term Debian Developer was being used to distinguish between project members who upload and those who do not. I strongly recommend reverting to the previous text. That's not what nm.debian.org says, which now uses Debian Developer, uploading and Debian Developer, non-uploading. (But that seems -project material.) Kind regards Philipp Kern signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 12:15:15AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: We are in the process of discussing a variety of constitutional amendments to be raised by the tech-ctte that will hopefully end up creating a sort of bundle of constitutional fixes to vote on. Perhaps it would be good to include in that a terminology standardization on member for the places in the constitution that we refer to voting project members rather than specifically people who upload software. Yes please! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120725092339.GD14507@debian
Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
Thread broken as topic changes. In-Reply-To: 500f3c96.90...@spamt.net Le Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 02:23:50AM +0200, Ulrich Dangel a écrit : From http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper: A Debian developer (DD) is a Debian Project Member who has uploading rights. Hi Ulrich, this page (and probably others) does not take into account that we have developers who do not maintain packages. I just changed it to: A '''Debian developer''' (DD) is a [[DebianProjectMember|Debian Project Member]] who has vote rights. Many maintain packages, but [[http://www.debian.org/News/2010/20101019|other contributions]] are very welcome as well. It can probably be further enhanced. Cheers, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120725004305.gf7...@falafel.plessy.net
Re: Modified http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper to mention non-packagers (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 09:43:05AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: Le Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 02:23:50AM +0200, Ulrich Dangel a écrit : From http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDeveloper: A Debian developer (DD) is a Debian Project Member who has uploading rights. this page (and probably others) does not take into account that we have developers who do not maintain packages. I just changed it to: A '''Debian developer''' (DD) is a [[DebianProjectMember|Debian Project Member]] who has vote rights. Many maintain packages, but [[http://www.debian.org/News/2010/20101019|other contributions]] are very welcome as well. It can probably be further enhanced. Yes, as the new wording is logically inconsistent. *By definition* a Debian Project Member, as the term is being used here, is someone who has voting rights. The term Debian Developer was being used to distinguish between project members who upload and those who do not. I strongly recommend reverting to the previous text. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
