Hai! Pierre Habouzit <madco...@madism.org> writes: > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 12:28:06PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: >> Size is just one ingredient. There are plenty of other ways to diminish >> barrier to deploy big changes in Debian: wider commit access rights, >> larger VCS repositories, more liberal NMUs, etc. (Unsurprisingly, >> several Debian derivatives have decide to pursue those other ways and >> one might argue that they have done so learning from Debian experience.) > > [...] > > Oh yes, you really want to "attract" new contributors ? build debhub.com > (as in github) and force everyone to package stuff in there.
Ehm, forcing people to use a certain VCS is usually a good way to _lose_ contributors... > - PPA should focus on: > * co-installability when endurable; > * documented and working rollback to unstable (IOW downgrading a > package to unstable when co-installability is not possible > should work well enough, idealy using pinning and apt, but a > documented procedure is good enough too). Wait, that's a completely orthogonal problem. Rollbacks of package upgrades is unsupported generally, trying to solve this at the same time as the PPA issue is a bad idea. There's no reason to connect these things. Marc
pgpbX0AFHhhF9.pgp
Description: PGP signature
