Andreas Tille writes ("Re: Bug#1089975: ITS: xfonts-traditional"):
> Am Sat, Dec 14, 2024 at 11:11:55PM +0000 schrieb Ian Jackson:
> > One concern I have is that, err, how to put this: I think some people
> > may consider xfonts-traditional "obsolete" or "cruft" or "wrong" or
> > something. If you're confident that those kind of issues aren't going
> > to arise then, please carry on.
>
> The package has non-zero popcon, is not in Git, and has no bugs labeling
> it as "obsolete," "cruft," or "wrong." Moving it to Salsa under the
> Fonts team would allow broader contributions and oversight. The team can
> evaluate and, if necessary, propose its removal as the best course of
> action.
I wasn't clear, evidently. Let me restate:
I'm strongly of the opinion that the package should *not* be removed.
My concern is that some people may disapprove of this package.
You'll surely be aware that other packages that make the system behave
in a more "traditional" way have been the subject of unwarranted
removals, and other kinds of intensely unpleasant political difficulty.
In this case I'm not aware of any actual opposition, so my
apprehension is merely precautionary.
> I initially followed my `gbp import-dsc` habit (and should have known
> its not the best choice in this case :-() and thus recreated the history
> from dgit. The repository in Salsa now contains the complete dgit
> history.
Thanks.
> 1. You subscribe the package directly in tracker
> 2. I can move the package to the debian/ team and set you as
> Maintainer
I think given what I said above about some people possibly disagreeing
with the package's existence, 2 is probably best.
> Thanks again for your quick response (which is unfortunately a very
> rare exception for ITS bugs)
I have quite a few packages which have been around for a very long
time, and which generally require changes very rarely. Sometimes
those changes are done by NMUs; personally, if I find myself
interacting with a package rarely, I don't prioritise improving the
development workflow.
So, your contributions to improving the workflow, git setup, etc., are
very much appreciated.
(FTR, if you do the upload with dgit, you're welcome to do it as a
"team upload" rather than an NMU.)
> > [...] My opinion is that all uploads should be done with dgit where
> > possible. But I don't feel entitled to request this unless I'm the
> > maintainer, or something.
>
> I'm fine to learn more so I will do so once we clarified the best
> option in what team the package should be maintained.
Of course. I'm happy to advise if you get into any difficulties.
(I'm also often around on irc, where I'm Diziet.)
Regards,
Ian.
--
Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own.
Pronouns: they/he. If I emailed you from @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk,
that is a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
