2015-06-02 2:33 GMT+02:00 Reinhard Tartler siret...@gmail.com:
I don't think I have any new input to add to this discussion. The majority
of participants seem to think that the two uploaders rule is not useful as
it hinders the adoption of new packages. While, I found this a desirable
Am Dienstag, den 02.06.2015, 20:23 +0200 schrieb Sebastian Ramacher:
For me the team has become an umbrella for multimedia packages where we help
each other in case its needed (RC bugs for example) in a more sensible way
than
mininmal diffs for an NMU.
^ this.
- Fabian
signature.asc
On 2015-05-31 08:58:58, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
Any idea how to determine clearly no longer maintained? I think the
2-maintainers rule was intended to provide a way to demarcate that
line, but it didn't fulfill its promise.
Because the rule isn't enforced properly. I'd rather argue to
On 31 May 2015 at 19:36, Reinhard Tartler siret...@gmail.com wrote:
IMO, if there is no need for team commitment, then there is no need
for the package to be under team maintenance in the first place. In
this case, it really doesn't matter if the package has a dedicated
maintainer or a team
Hi Reinhard,
Just answering this unanswered question from the thread as I have
nothing more (worth adding) to the rest. And everyone is probably tired :-)
On 06/01/2015 12:36 AM, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
Can I suggest that for new packages:
1. the one intending to ITP asks if the team are
On Jun 1, 2015 7:11 AM, Felipe Sateler fsate...@debian.org wrote:
On 31 May 2015 at 19:36, Reinhard Tartler siret...@gmail.com wrote:
IMO, if there is no need for team commitment, then there is no need
for the package to be under team maintenance in the first place. In
this case, it really
On Jun 1, 2015 1:35 AM, Fabian Greffrath fab...@debian.org wrote:
And by the current rule, would libav still qualify as being
pkg-multimedia team-maintained?
I would say yes: Most recently, Sebastian has not only provided commits,
but even uploaded several packages to both unstable and
Hi Ross,
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Ross Gammon r...@the-gammons.net wrote:
On 05/31/2015 02:58 PM, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
Well, it really boils down what we want the team's reputation to be.
The rule tests whether or not there is *team* commitment, and for that
you need *more than one
On 05/31/2015 07:55 PM, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
Hi Ross,
[...] Quick response!
I agree in principle. But for me, having two uploaders does not test if
there is team commitment.
I see two ways how to interpret this sentiment:
a) the check is not strict enough, and misses many too many
On 05/31/2015 02:58 PM, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
Well, it really boils down what we want the team's reputation to be.
The rule tests whether or not there is *team* commitment, and for that
you need *more than one person* actively caring for a package. If a
package fails the two active uploaders
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Ross Gammon r...@the-gammons.net wrote:
If someone suggests a new package is brought into the team, and it is
accepted, then the team is making a commitment at that point.
How can you determine team commitment if only a single person is
working on the
Quoting Reinhard Tartler (2015-06-01 00:36:32)
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Ross Gammon r...@the-gammons.net wrote:
If someone suggests a new package is brought into the team, and it
is accepted, then the team is making a commitment at that point.
How can you determine team commitment
Am Sonntag, den 31.05.2015, 08:58 -0400 schrieb Reinhard Tartler:
If the majority of the packages in team pkg-multimedia are effectively
taken care of by a single person, how is that package simply not team
maintained at all?
Not yet.
As it stands, the rule already applies to the first
2015-05-27 9:26 GMT+02:00 Fabian Greffrath fab...@debian.org:
Am Dienstag, den 26.05.2015, 14:38 +0200 schrieb Sebastian Ramacher:
I think the rule is useless. It doesn't prevent us from having two persons on
Uploaders and both are MIA. I'd rather orphan/remove the packages from the
team that
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 8:49 AM, Felipe Sateler fsate...@debian.org wrote:
On 26 May 2015 at 09:38, Sebastian Ramacher sramac...@debian.org wrote:
On 2015-05-26 14:33:41, IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU) wrote:
hmm, nobody ever answered to this email.
mira's recent mail regarding a 2nd
2015-05-27 9:26 GMT+02:00 Fabian Greffrath fab...@debian.org:
Am Dienstag, den 26.05.2015, 14:38 +0200 schrieb Sebastian Ramacher:
I think the rule is useless. It doesn't prevent us from having two persons on
Uploaders and both are MIA. I'd rather orphan/remove the packages from the
team that
Am Dienstag, den 26.05.2015, 14:38 +0200 schrieb Sebastian Ramacher:
I think the rule is useless. It doesn't prevent us from having two persons on
Uploaders and both are MIA. I'd rather orphan/remove the packages from the
team that are clearly no longer maintained and nobody in the team cares
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 8:26 AM, Fabian Greffrath fab...@debian.org wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 26.05.2015, 14:38 +0200 schrieb Sebastian Ramacher:
I think the rule is useless. It doesn't prevent us from having two persons on
Uploaders and both are MIA. I'd rather orphan/remove the packages from
On 26 May 2015 at 09:38, Sebastian Ramacher sramac...@debian.org wrote:
On 2015-05-26 14:33:41, IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU) wrote:
hmm, nobody ever answered to this email.
mira's recent mail regarding a 2nd uploader of qxgedit reminded me of
that, and i would like to re-ask:
How
hmm, nobody ever answered to this email.
mira's recent mail regarding a 2nd uploader of qxgedit reminded me of
that, and i would like to re-ask:
How much do we want to enforce our =2 uploaders per package rule?
If a package does not have a 2nd uploader (any longer), should it be
removed from
On 2015-05-26 14:33:41, IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU) wrote:
hmm, nobody ever answered to this email.
mira's recent mail regarding a 2nd uploader of qxgedit reminded me of
that, and i would like to re-ask:
How much do we want to enforce our =2 uploaders per package rule?
If a package
On 2015-05-26 09:49:43, Felipe Sateler wrote:
On 26 May 2015 at 09:38, Sebastian Ramacher sramac...@debian.org wrote:
On 2015-05-26 14:33:41, IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU) wrote:
hmm, nobody ever answered to this email.
mira's recent mail regarding a 2nd uploader of qxgedit
due to a few recent mails [1], i was wondering how much we (would like
to) enforce our 2 uploaders per package rule.
i know of at least one package i maintain under the hood of
pkg-multimedia-maintainers, which has only a single uploader (me,
obviously).
soundscaperenderer
is anybody
23 matches
Mail list logo
