control: tag -1 +moreinfo
Hi,
I'm using this (nice, alive...) package
and I'm willing to maintain it in the Python Team.
Greetings,
Alexandre
Hello!
python3-poetry-dynamic-versioning recently landed in the archive and I
wanted to make it known!
This package does something similar to python3-setuptools-scm and can be
used in Debian in a similar way.
You can use it manually with the following snippet, but pybuild's next
release
On 2/28/24 12:44, Scott Kitterman wrote:
Everyone in Debian is already bound by the code of conduct already, so it seems
redundant to add it here again.
I agree.
Thomas
Hi,
* Andreas Tille [2024-02-28 11:51]:
I think it could be useful for the routine-update command to stop
when such file is hit, in order to raise the importance that the
package has quirks, and should not be casually updated without
involved scrutiny. I wonder whether this can be
Hi Scott,
Am Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 09:19:29AM -0500 schrieb Scott Kitterman:
> Looking at your list, I note that it includes team members that have been
> very
> active in team wide work, not just on their own packages.
I'm fully aware of this.
> I think it would be
> contrary to the spirit
Hi Scott,
Am Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 11:44:07AM + schrieb Scott Kitterman:
>
> This makes more sense to me. It is completely understandable that how things
> are communicated affects how people feel about them. This is a difficult
> thing to get right. I have experienced similar
On Wednesday, February 28, 2024 3:21:12 AM EST Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Louis-Philippe (just quoting below in case you might have missed it) is
> repeating the importance that anyone who thinks my suggestion (MR[1]) is
> a bad idea make themselves heard. I'm hereby adding those maintainers
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Edward Betts
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-de...@lists.debian.org, debian-python@lists.debian.org
* Package name: python-usb-devices
Version : 0.4.5
Upstream Author : J. Nick Koston
* URL :
On February 28, 2024 9:54:55 AM UTC, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>On 2/28/24 00:54, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> It's self-induced. I mean if it's demotivating to have people point out
>> that you didn't follow the policy, then you can solve that all by yourself
>> by following the policy. If I
On February 28, 2024 7:08:14 AM UTC, Andreas Tille wrote:
>Hi Scott,
>
>Am Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 11:54:01PM + schrieb Scott Kitterman:
>> It's self-induced. I mean if it's demotivating to have people point out
>> that you didn't follow the policy, then you can solve that all by yourself
Hi Étienne,
Am Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 09:37:59AM +0100 schrieb Étienne Mollier:
> > > Instead of restricting collaboration, we could let policy encourage
> > > maintainers to state such constraints in debian/README.DPT and ask team
> > > members to check that file before they team-upload.
> >
> >
On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 09:05:44AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi,
>
> [...]
+1 from me, too. I had completely forgotten this paragraph in the
Python policy and it doesn't make that much sense. I personally
generally do send an email to anyone in the "Maintainers" field or the
last uploader
On 2/28/24 09:21, Andreas Tille wrote:
Hi,
Louis-Philippe (just quoting below in case you might have missed it) is
repeating the importance that anyone who thinks my suggestion (MR[1]) is
a bad idea make themselves heard. I'm hereby adding those maintainers
who have more than 5 packages that
On 2/28/24 00:54, Scott Kitterman wrote:
It's self-induced. I mean if it's demotivating to have people point out that
you didn't follow the policy, then you can solve that all by yourself by
following the policy. If I take your argument to its logical conclusion, all
of Debian's rules can
Hi,
2024-02-27 09:06 CET, Andreas Tille:
> I probably should have reviewed the DPT policy on Maintainership[3] more
> carefully. In other teams, it's common for the Maintainer to be set to
> the team, so I assumed it was just an oversight when I made this
> change[4] when touching the package to
Hello,
I support this change too. I am myself set to maintainer of packages
just because whatever tool we used at the time to generate debian/
directory for a package did that.
On 2024-02-28 09:21, Andreas Tille wrote:
Hi,
Louis-Philippe (just quoting below in case you might have missed
Hi all,
Andreas Tille, on 2024-02-28:
> Am Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 04:08:51PM +0100 schrieb Timo Röhling:
> > I guess the motivation behind the weak collaboration model is that some
> > packages have hidden "gotchas", which a casual team uploader might not know.
> > For instance, pygit2 is one of
Hi,
Louis-Philippe (just quoting below in case you might have missed it) is
repeating the importance that anyone who thinks my suggestion (MR[1]) is
a bad idea make themselves heard. I'm hereby adding those maintainers
who have more than 5 packages that are affected and did not yet raised
their
Am Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 04:25:49PM + schrieb weepingclown:
> While perfectly understanding the weak collaboration model reasoning, I've
> still always found DPT as uploader and not maintainer rather absurd TBH. The
> current go to tool (as I understand it) for python packaging, py2dsp, also
19 matches
Mail list logo
