* Any other business
Notes from the previous monthly meeting:
http://meetbot.debian.net/debian-ctte/2021/debian-ctte.2021-04-14-17.57.html
People with AIs: ehashman, marga, smcv
--
Sean Whitton
r not?
* Moving forward with our reimagining the TC tasks
* Any other business
Notes from the previous monthly meeting:
http://meetbot.debian.net/debian-ctte/2021/debian-ctte.2021-03-17-17.59.html
People with AIs: ehashman, marga, smcv
--
Sean Whitton
seen concrete tooling problems
which would give us good reasons to disable compression.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Resending signed.
On Mon 15 Mar 2021 at 08:46AM -07, Sean Whitton wrote:
> On Mon 15 Mar 2021 at 10:30AM +01, Margarita Manterola wrote:
>
>> ===BEGIN===
>>
>> The chair of the Debian Technical Committee will be:
>>
>> A : Margarita Manterola
>>
On Mon 15 Mar 2021 at 10:30AM +01, Margarita Manterola wrote:
> ===BEGIN===
>
> The chair of the Debian Technical Committee will be:
>
> A : Margarita Manterola
> B : David Bremner
> C : Niko Tyni
> D : Gunnar Wolf
> E : Simon McVittie
> F : Sean Whi
Hello,
On Sun 07 Mar 2021 at 03:50PM -07, Sean Whitton wrote:
> This is not much good if your network is weak or you're offline, or you
> don't want information on your debugging to go out to a web service.
What I mean is: debuginfod is great in many scenarios, but we should
pro
nformation on your debugging to go out to a web service.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
you think you could do some grouping -- e.g. put all the kde packages
together and see what that comes to? A lot of debugging scenarios are
going to involve groups of packages like these.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
on
>
> ===END
I vote
A > B
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Thu 04 Feb 2021 at 03:20PM -08, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Jan 2021 12:01:02 -0700 Sean Whitton
> wrote:
>> On Mon 07 Nov 2011 at 06:34PM +01, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
>> > I agree it could be done by default with compat 9. Will decrease the
>> >
Hello Bastien,
On Mon 07 Nov 2011 at 06:34PM +01, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> I agree it could be done by default with compat 9. Will decrease the
> size of archive also. I need more than 10G in order to debug kde...
Does this sort of thing still apply in 2021?
Thanks.
--
Sean W
are not sure whether anyone is finding this useful in the
present technological era, so to speak.
Please write to #922744 if you are affected by this. Thanks.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
release of 'bullseye'.
We do not recommend any particular implementation of the migration.
Y: Yes, support only merged-usr in the 'bookworm' release.
N: No, continue to support both layouts in 'bookworm'.
F: Further Discussion
===END
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Mon 25 Jan 2021 at 11:45AM -07, Sean Whitton wrote:
> I call for votes on the following ballot to resolve #978636. The voting
> period starts immediately and lasts for up to one week, or until the
> outcome is no longer in doubt (§6.3.1).
>
> ===BEGIN
> The T
-sysvinit-scripts if for whatever reason it ends up being
> necessary?
Once the package has cleared NEW, we should definitely mention it in
Policy; whether we say anything to discourage dropping init scripts is
trickier however.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Mon 28 Dec 2020 at 12:24AM +01, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Dec 2020 15:39:47 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>
>> On Sun 27 Dec 2020 at 07:26PM +02, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>> > My reasoning is that init scripts are the end goal, and that elogind is
>> &
s elogind and not init scripts.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Tue 15 Dec 2020 at 11:14AM GMT, Mark Hindley wrote:
> Sean and Simon,
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 01:17:30PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> > In the cases where the regression was accidental, ideally, the answer
>> > would be someone calmly and politely offe
s later perhaps it is more.) On the
other hand, in #922744, there is only an unsubstantiated reference to
tooling support.
I'm going to write to the submitter of #922744 asking for more info.
> Why punt it to you?
> ===
>
> [...]
I think the reasons you
wade
through discussions on salsa -- we need a summary.
Please make another attempt at summarising the dispute. Please also
indicate which of the TC's powers (as granted by the constitution) you
are asking us to make use of.
Thanks.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Mon 14 Dec 2020 at 10:58AM GMT, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Dec 2020 at 14:38:24 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>
>> Participants in the thread who have argued on that side of the
>> discussion seem to implicitly rely on the idea that a package maintainer
>
responsibility on the NM maintainer which do not rely on the idea that a
package maintainer is equally responsible for regressions anywhere in
their package, or, of course, an argument that I'm misunderstanding
what's being implicitly assumed.
The dependency issue is more challenging.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ving this dispute would necessarily involve the TC interacting with
the GR in a way that the constitution does not permit. We are being
asked to decide about one package, and being invited to generalise in a
way that falls within the scope of our dispute resolution role.
--
Sean Whitton
lack more detailed
input from the package maintainer.
We can speculate as to whether the dispute would have proceeded better
or worse with more verbose messages from Michael before now, but it
would be beside the point.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
lack more detailed
input from the package maintainer.
We can speculate as to whether the dispute would have proceeded better
or worse with more verbose messages from Michael before now, but it
would be beside the point.
--
Sean Whitton
Hello,
Just to note that we had a meeting today:
http://meetbot.debian.net/debian-ctte/2020/debian-ctte.2020-11-18-17.58.html
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
his summary.
At today's meeting one point which we thought was missing from this
summary was that no-one on the committee has any appetite for overruling
the package maintainer, so it is very unlikely that will be the outcome
of this bug.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
named
> systemd-standalone-sysusers and systemd-standalone-tmpfiles
> - Those binaries packages would only ship /bin/systemd-sysusers resp.
> /bin/systemd-tmpfiles and have a Conflicts/Replaces: systemd
From an ftpteam perspective it would probably be preferable to have a
single systemd-standalon
give us some input, please?
Thanks.
--
Sean Whitton
Hello Dmitry,
On Wed 21 Oct 2020 at 11:21am +11, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> On Wednesday, 21 October 2020 6:16:03 AM AEDT Sean Whitton wrote:
>> I think that my message [1] is what makes you think that the package
>> would not have got through NEW?
>
> It was not your message
igure out what
to do about this package given our present tooling.
--
Sean Whitton
d when someone chooses to accept a less-than-ideal
approach as necessary when one has put a lot of time into trying to find
workable alternatives.
The thing is, both (a) and (b) are motivated by the same basic desire to
make Debian better and more useful, so perhaps we can focus on that
point of commonality.
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2020/03/msg00363.html
--
Sean Whitton
which were certainly interesting, but
which I didn't think could be actionable within our current conception
of the scope of the reform project. But we could come back to them
after the current project has concluded.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
oin the Community Team.
So what you are proposing would correspond to the last of our
proposals -- try to remove the meditation role the TC presently has?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
he community team as mostly about the CoC -- not
just strict violations but conformance with its spirit -- whereas the TC
is about disagreements which do not involve (or do not primarily
involve) CoC issues. In which case, the relationship between the two
would not really fit the model you suggest.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Sun 26 Jul 2020 at 08:47AM -07, Sean Whitton wrote:
> It's late in the day but I would like to suggest including this
> paragraph in the document in some form.
Thank you for doing this in commits today. I'd like to suggest going a
bit further, however -- how about th
gt; the issue of mediation above.
I think the idea might be to accept that people aren't very good at this
and try to help them earlier.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
hand having it on the list of proposals could forestall
"what about ..." discussion from people who aren't really in favour of
the option but are inclined towards discussing each possibility.
In the end, I'm happy to trust your judgement on whether completeness is
a go
Dear Ian,
On Sat 18 Jul 2020 at 10:16AM -07, Sean Whitton wrote:
> On Sat 18 Jul 2020 at 04:29PM +02, Margarita Manterola wrote:
>
>> The doc collects the main problems that have been raised about the TC
>> and a bunch of proposals of what we can do about it. Neither list is
&g
cts like ours. So I would like
to have a concrete conception of how this could make the TC more useful
before going down that road.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
; D : Niko Tyni
> E : Gunnar Wolf
> F : Simon McVittie
> G : Sean Whitton
> H : Elana Hashman
>
> ===END===
I vote: B > C > A = D = E = F > G = H
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
te a list of talking points before
the session, and structure the BoF around them.
Please address your questions and talking points to
, preferably in reply to this message for
easier collation.
=
[the plan]
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Tue 23 Jun 2020 at 01:47AM +02, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Sean Whitton (2020-06-22 23:26:37)
>> Would someone want to use libjs-katex without nodejs installed?
>
> Yes: Pandoc can produce output which uses katex rendered with the
> Javascript interpreter of we
ugh. They could have just asked for an explanation before rejecting.
You should ensure it's visible in the source package, in
README.{source,Debian} and/or d/changelog.
--
Sean Whitton
sciously
chosen to use a binary package split to solve a problem and that's a
reasonable way to go about solving the problem, we'll sign off on it.
--
Sean Whitton
Hello,
On Fri 12 Jun 2020 at 10:46AM -03, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> So, please [submit your talk, sprint, and BoF proposals][1] for DebConf
> 20 Online.
>
> [1]: https://debconf20.debconf.org/cfp/
Should we try to organise a virtual Meet the Technical Committee?
--
Sean Whitton
a vote on that, so that might be a reason to use that in
official mail like this one.
> The Technical Committee now consists of:
>
> * Margarita Manterola (chairperson)
> * Philip Hands
> * David Bremner
> * Niko Tyni
> * Gunnar Wolf
> * Simon McVittie
> * E
Hello,
On Thu 28 May 2020 at 09:39AM -07, Sean Whitton wrote:
> I don't believe that odyx, philh or tfheen are members anymore; their
> terms expired. marga is the current chair.
Er. Phil is still a member. Sorry :)
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
gt; * Elana Hashman
> * Sean Whitton
>
> I am extremely happy to follow their recommendation and hereby
> appoint Elana and Sean as members of the Technical Committee, effective
> immediately.
>
> For reference, their nominations and votes are recorded at:
>
> * https://bugs.
a substantial issue
> that ought to be dealt with.
>
> While vacillation is undesirable, making it easier and less socially
> costly to handle mistakes, will make it easier to make changes.
I agree that this could help a lot. I have certainly felt hesitation
before committing a change, thinking "maybe we should give people more
time to raise issues with this change", and this would avoid that sort
of situation.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
rried about.
When I took on the role of Policy Editor I subscribed myself to the
T.C.'s mailing list. I consider it part of the role to keep abreast of
their activities. In light of the present thread, I'll keep in mind the
need to flag to the T.C. places where decisions they are abo
a
sprawling, unmanageable morass of difficult problems. That isn't how
things are, because while there are indeed a lot of hard problems, they
are largely independent of each other, and tackling individual
debian-policy bugs really does improve Debian. However, it is much
harder to see that when half of the open bugs are more than five years
old yet not tagged wontfix.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
rt fails in a maintscript is left up to package
>maintainer discretion, and close the bugs
> [...]
I no longer think this would be useful enough to have in Policy, but I'd
like to hear from anyone who disagrees.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ke a change
to the Policy Manual because of a particular T.C. decision.
It's very complicated and time-consuming to discuss in the abstract, and
it has not actually been a problem in at least the last two to three
years.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
thing that could be solved by
patching the Policy Manual, the T.C. should respond to the question by
opening a bug against the Policy Manual, and suspending the T.C. bug
until it becomes clear whether or not that debian-policy bug is going to
reach consensus?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
27;t want to be in the line of fire when difficult decisions are
> being made, and perhaps because they didn't want to try to become
> experts in everything. But it means that uncontroversial changes can
> languish.
Do you (or anyone else) have any concrete ideas for simplifying the
proposer/seconder scheme, without significantly reducing the oversight
on changes, even uncontroversial ones?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
his. Should be in the next Policy
release.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
wording of my initial mail was ambiguous with regard to
which one of these was being requested.
I would be grateful if you would micromanage just enough that there
isn't anything controversial left for people to disagree about :)
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Sat 15 Sep 2018 at 07:06PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> A first draft is below, feedback on wording and content appreciated.
LGTM, thank you.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ition:
>
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 09:22:17AM +0800, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> For example, someone might want to use a Debian system to investigate a
>> bug on an Ubuntu system. They might begin by downloading some source
>> packages from the Ubuntu mirrors. Since they obtaine
;
> This package skips steps 1 and 2, but does all of steps 3-6.
But all of steps 3--6 are part of the package build.
"The source" is what you get after steps 1 and 2.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
is surely a completely separate issue (which we should discuss at the
level of Debian Policy, not refer directly to the T.C.).
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
time to fix their
> packages
> and only become a MUST once those packages have been fixed (or something
> along those lines, maybe after buster is released).
I'd like to suggest giving a window of time. Otherwise the policy
process alone won't really have the authority to swit
Hello,
On Fri 17 Aug 2018 at 12:01AM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 09:22:17AM +0800, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> For example, someone might want to use a Debian system to investigate a
>> bug on an Ubuntu system. They might begin by downloading some source
>&
Hello,
Thank you for your reply.
On Thu 09 Aug 2018 at 09:19pm +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] Sean Whitton
>
>> The general question about which I am seeking advice: does the
>> T.C. think that Debian can be consistent on service (re)starts in
>> maintscripts, or
t and
> undermines both Policy and TC.)
We're not really in the normal Policy case anymore, because normally
people talk it out and reach consensus. For this bug that simply has
not happened.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Sun 29 Jul 2018 at 10:14PM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Sean Whitton dijo [Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 09:30:04AM +0800]:
>> > I believe his request might also be considered under §6.1.1, since we're
>> > being asked about a policy change. (After talking to Sean
nk technically it's §6.1.3 because according to the policy team
delegation, we decide what goes into the policy manual.
But it certainly falls under at least one of §6.1.1 and §6.1.3, and not
§6.1.4.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
sk the T.C. to decide what maintscripts should do in these cases.
The general question about which I am seeking advice: does the
T.C. think that Debian can be consistent on service (re)starts in
maintscripts, or is the best we can do to leave it up to package
maintainer discretion?
Thanks.
--
Se
on for a
lot of our source packages, but these are much more subtle and not
a matter of the system on which the source package is unpacked, so
I suggest leaving those aside for this bug.
[2] https://bugs.debian.org/850156#55
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
a healthy number of people putting themselves
forward for the TC.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
On Tue, Nov 28 2017, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> - The TC *does not* make the number of nominees or number of
> accepted nominations public.
I'm curious to here the thinking behind this particular line of the
procedure.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ding, but thought it'd be useful to point at the
> previous discussion about this very subject.
Thank you for digging this up!
I have no desire to argue in favour of either your patch or mine, but
since mine has been okayed by three TC members in this bug, in the
interests of getting th
val for the patch, with the plural/singular fixed?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ar that there is a reference back to the
> earlier definition?
>
> If you meant to get rid of that, no problem.
Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean. Are you referring to the paragraph I
deleted?
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
o available
-from the Debian web mirrors at https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/menu-policy/";>https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/menu-policy/.
+If a package installs a FreeDesktop desktop entries, it must
+not also install a Debian menu entry.
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ktop file", but given that we have deprecated menu
files, it seems like the right way to reflect the change.
> The action to draft language for that has stalled in the policy
> process.
Is there a policy bug that got stalled? If not, maybe this bug should
just be reassigned to policy?
201 - 277 of 277 matches
Mail list logo
