Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

Philip Hands writes ("Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)"): > Until now I've tended to be irritated by the way courts do that, but > suddenly I have more of an understanding of why they do ;-) > > Having someone

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

Scott Kitterman writes: > On Monday, December 12, 2016 01:16:49 PM Ian Jackson wrote: >> Scott Kitterman writes ("Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in > source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)"): >> > If anyone can unilaterally add

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

On Monday, December 12, 2016 01:16:49 PM Ian Jackson wrote: > Scott Kitterman writes ("Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)"): > > If anyone can unilaterally add themselves as maintainer (to pick one > > proposal as

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

Scott Kitterman writes ("Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)"): > If anyone can unilaterally add themselves as maintainer (to pick one > proposal as an example) and make intrusive package changes (since > they are a

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

On December 11, 2016 8:50:19 PM EST, Ian Jackson wrote: >Scott Kitterman writes ("Re: Formal declaration of weak package >ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose >maintainers)"): >> These changes will require, at the very least, policy

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

Scott Kitterman writes ("Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)"): > These changes will require, at the very least, policy changes. We > have a process for that. > > Unless this thing is somehow opt-in only, be

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

On December 11, 2016 8:25:05 PM EST, Ian Jackson wrote: >Enrico Zini writes ("Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership >in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)"): >> On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 03:42:57PM +, Ian Jackson

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

Enrico Zini writes ("Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)"): > On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 03:42:57PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: > > > It's a lot simpler to keep this metadata outside source package. > > I endorse this

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 03:42:57PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: > > It's a lot simpler to keep this metadata outside source package. > I endorse this product and/or service. Here's one way to quickly build a service like this: - Configure the web server to accept Debian's SSO credentials:

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

* Adam Borowski [161206 10:10]: > On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 09:18:49AM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > > What I currently find inconvenient about the LowThresholdNmu page is, that > > it > > is external to the source package. So after having found a package I want to > > fix

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

Lars Wirzenius writes ("Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)"): > For example, there's corner cases that get tricky. A package might > only be in stable, but the maintainer wants to declare it as >

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 04:15:22PM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > why would it be important to change that kind of information for a package in > stable? The audience interested in this field is interested in uploads to > unstable, so is it not sufficient if the information is up-to-date there?

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 04:15:22PM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > why would it be important to change that kind of information for a package in > stable? The audience interested in this field is interested in uploads to > unstable, so is it not sufficient if the information is up-to-date there?

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

Hi, Quoting Lars Wirzenius (2016-12-06 16:06:30) > On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 03:50:12PM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > > Actually, this is a great argument for why this information should be in a > > deb822 field in the source package itself. > > FWIW, I think this is the kind of information

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 03:50:12PM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > Actually, this is a great argument for why this information should be in a > deb822 field in the source package itself. FWIW, I think this is the kind of information that should be kept out of the source package, since changing

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

Hi, Quoting Holger Levsen (2016-12-06 15:15:53) > On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 03:08:54PM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > > > https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/multistrap > > I see that https://wiki.debian.org/LowThresholdNmu lists you as > > [[JohannesSchauer|Johannes 'josch' Schauer]] while the

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 03:08:54PM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > > https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/multistrap > I see that https://wiki.debian.org/LowThresholdNmu lists you as > [[JohannesSchauer|Johannes 'josch' Schauer]] while the maintainer field is > Johannes Schauer , that

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 02:55:57PM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > Quoting Adam Borowski (2016-12-06 09:36:08) > > On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 09:18:49AM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > > > What I currently find inconvenient about the LowThresholdNmu page is, > > > that it > > > is external to the

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

Hi, Quoting Adam Borowski (2016-12-06 09:36:08) > On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 09:18:49AM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > > What I currently find inconvenient about the LowThresholdNmu page is, that > > it > > is external to the source package. So after having found a package I want to > > fix I

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

Johannes Schauer writes ("Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)"): > I think the thread has derailed here a little bit but I think that > Lars and Tollef are aware that their proposals are orthogonal to the > problem you

Re: Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 09:18:49AM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > What I currently find inconvenient about the LowThresholdNmu page is, that it > is external to the source package. So after having found a package I want to > fix I have to manually look up on that wiki page whether the maintainer

Formal declaration of weak package ownership in source packages (was: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers)

Hi, Quoting Ian Jackson (2016-12-05 23:04:48) > Tollef Fog Heen writes ("Re: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers [and > 1 more messages]"): > > A similar proposal: Have a way of declaring the package to be under > > collective maintenance (put it under collab-maint on alioth + > >