When people hear I'm from Debian, this is the second most common
question I get.
The first is about systemd and gives me a great opportunity to talk
about how Debian works and about how we're a community facing tough
challenges together.
Here's the answer I give on this issue for Debian of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 4/2/19 3:22 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Given these upstream shifts, is attempting to package as much
> software as possible something that actually benefits Debian and
> our users, or is it something that brings us a duplication of
> effort? If
Debian prides itself on shipping large quantities of free software with
a strong level of stability within a release. A huge number of users
around the world rely on Debian as a solid base for their infrastructure
and derivative works, and our packaging policy makes it easier for us to
ensure
On 15360 March 1977, David Kalnischkies wrote:
Old codebases usually do not attract many new people.
Well, yes, but what is that supposed to mean?
Not much more than something you probably already knew.
APT had at least one (serious) sort of rewrite (cupt) which isn't
exactly overrun
Hi Jonathan,
On 3/30/19 4:53 PM, Jonathan Carter wrote:
>
>
> That's right, geographical diversity has some significance. There's been
> some discussion all over about privilege lately and how it affects free
> software contributions. Free software developers tend to come from
> backgrounds
Hey David
On 2019/04/02 17:51, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 11:04:17PM +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
>>> for DPL Candidates"[1] article as stats about the prospective DPLs seem
>>> to be in demand[2] I had to wonder if the DPL candidates wanted to take
>>> the opportunity
Hi Sam
On 2019/04/02 19:01, Sam Hartman wrote:
> 3.5) While I'm hear I want to call attention to one critical
> accessibility issue that we've made no progress on. Throughout my entire
> time in Debian, super cow powers have been denied to me, all entirely
> because I'm blind. It's true, I've
> On 02/04/19 at 17:24 +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
>> ¹ with an exception for the 1% of packages which actually really need it
>> and are deploying DPKG_ROOT at least. The rest should really make due
>> with declarations of what it needs rather than buggy imperative scripts.
>
> Can you
Hi. I've been struggling with this question for the reasons I outlined
in my response to Zac.
As I mentioned, I am not comfortable helping people choose the DPL based
on their personal beliefs outside of the scope of what the DPL is
actually responsible for.
I think asking what problems the DPL
On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 10:36:09AM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> You know, if thats just some 1st april joke, its a bad one.
Mails involving APT on the 1st April are never just jokes. Five years
ago we e.g. announced the 16th birthday with our binary release[0].
People though the java-remark
On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 11:04:17PM +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
> > for DPL Candidates"[1] article as stats about the prospective DPLs seem
> > to be in demand[2] I had to wonder if the DPL candidates wanted to take
> > the opportunity to "perhaps" "make" "nice" and "good" comments "maybe"
> >
Hi David
On 2019/04/02 17:24, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 08:15:39PM +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
>> 3. Make APT more competitive
>
> mmdebstrap (a debootstrap alternative) is a lovely example of putting
> APT into a field it wasn't initially created for and run with it:
On 02/04/19 at 17:24 +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> ¹ with an exception for the 1% of packages which actually really need it
> and are deploying DPKG_ROOT at least. The rest should really make due
> with declarations of what it needs rather than buggy imperative scripts.
Can you summarize the
On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 08:15:39PM +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
> 3. Make APT more competitive
mmdebstrap (a debootstrap alternative) is a lovely example of putting
APT into a field it wasn't initially created for and run with it: Now,
wrap a GUI around it, make it bootstrap a chroot in your
Hi,
On 02.04.19 05:59, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote:
> Some teams might dislike it, but I guess those people will also dislike
> the idea of giving all DDs commit access on all packages VCS.
Y'all are still solving social problems with technical solutions here,
and it's a bad technical
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 6:11 AM Sean Whitton wrote:
> Fair enough, thanks. I don't look at QA summaries opportunistically, so
> I see why we'd have different impressions in this area.
I wonder if folks are using how-can-i-help, that reports sponsorship
requests for packages you have installed
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 3:05 AM Sean Whitton wrote:
> If I have relevant expertise or experience to improve Debian in some
> particular respect (e.g. fixing bugs in a packages written in a
> particular programming language that isn't so commonly used), I have
> strong reason to use my time to
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 7:56 PM Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Gentoo, for instance, has been ported to Interix and macOS[1].
I note that there was at one time a Debian Interix port:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-interix/
https://web.archive.org/web/20170629135305/http://debian-interix.net/
--
On 2019/04/02 09:53, Jonas Meurer wrote:
> Gitlab subgroups would solve this problem: Move every Debian package
> into the 'debian' group, but allow subgroups in there:
>
> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/foo-team/libfoo
Yeah I was thinking along that too. It seems like subgroups under
/debian
On 15359 March 1977, David Kalnischkies wrote:
Mindless sweet talk might be boring through, so let me get some (wordy)
questions you can dwell on as much as you like (to improve stats[2]):
You know, if thats just some 1st april joke, its a bad one.
But there is some stuff in that can actually
On 15360 March 1977, Jonas Meurer wrote:
Gitlab subgroups would solve this problem: Move every Debian package
into the 'debian' group, but allow subgroups in there:
Not in the current way they work, no. Though there is a gitlab upstream
bug about it.
--
bye, Joerg
On 15359 March 1977, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
However, I wonder why you picked this ("maintained on salsa + upload
rights for all DD") as the first step towards increasing uniformity
(thus I assume that you see this as the most important thing to fix).
In practice, we already have a version
Raphael Hertzog:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 01 Apr 2019, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote:
>>> So if i had to decide how to implement this technique, i think the
>>> simplest thing would be to move every
>>> https://salsa.debian.org/foo-team/libfoo to
>>> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libfoo and let the
On 15359 March 1977, Jonas Meurer wrote:
Do you have concrete plans to improve the mutual/two-way communication
between the DPL and the rest of the project? Monthly bits from the DPL
are already helpful, but they're mostly a one-way communication so far.
I don't mean private communication
Hi,
On Mon, 01 Apr 2019, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote:
> > So if i had to decide how to implement this technique, i think the
> > simplest thing would be to move every
> > https://salsa.debian.org/foo-team/libfoo to
> > https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libfoo and let the debian/ grouping
> >
On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 06:42:36PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> However, I wonder why you picked this ("maintained on salsa + upload
> rights for all DD") as the first step towards increasing uniformity
> (thus I assume that you see this as the most important thing to fix).
>
> In practice, we
26 matches
Mail list logo
