Hi Guus!
Guus Sliepen wrote:
> I believe our current way of responding to ITPs for software that duplicates
> the functionality other software that is already in Debian is wrong.
>
> The worst part is that when we say "but we already have N frobnicators in
> Debian, we don't need an N+1th", we imply that the N pre-existing packages are
> OK but that this new package is Very Bad just because it came late to the
> game.
Thanks for summarizing the problem so nicely without getting
emotional. Now I don't have to send my flame on those "we don't need
an N+1th WM" guys for the wmfs ITP. :-)
> - Don't immediately start complaining to the submitter of the ITP. Just let
> the submitter devote his/her energy to packaging.
Very important and usually the primary fail.
> Some valid reasons to do complain immediately:
>
> - The software is very immature (version 0.1-alpha or something like that).
> - It's a simple script or very small program, and should be merged (either
> upstream or downstream) with another package.
> - It really is an exact duplicate or a fork of another package with almost
> no
> changes to the original.
Thanks for this list!
> - Research how many similar software packages are there actually in
> Debian, in what shape they are, whether they have active upstream
> and downstream maintainers. Complain about the worst package in
> that selection instead.
Good idea!
> - Go to the root of the problem: find out why upstream thinks they need to
> write their software. Maybe they can be convinced to combine their efforts
> with that of upstreams of similar packages. The ITP submitter should try
> that
> himself, I think.
I'd expect that this is rather an RFP issue than a ITP issue, except
maybe when someone changes an RFP to an ITP.
But most ITPs come from people who already have reason to use that
software they want to package.
> So, keep the friction low for maintainers who are actually doing something,
> and
> if you really feel strongly about duplicate software polluting Debian,
> concentrate your efforts at the existing packages.
Thanks again for that very constructive and calm mail on that topic!
Regards, Axel
--
,''`. | Axel Beckert <a...@debian.org>, http://people.debian.org/~abe/
: :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
`. `' | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE
`- | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120628160411.ge3...@sym.noone.org
