Hi all, On 03-08-2024 22:37, Salvo Tomaselli wrote:
At the bottom, is it ok for a package to have a single maintainer or not?
I have never wanted to be the single maintainer of a package, and here I am, I'm member of a bunch of teams, but most of my packages uploads (not a lot luckily) are for packages that nobody else uploads. The people that believe that package should not be single person maintained, please become co-maintainer of all the packages I list below, you're welcome.
In this discussion about single maintainer packages I nearly feel guilty, while at the same time I don't *want* to be the single maintainer. Actually, I don't want to maintain packages at all, my joy is elsewhere in Debian.
I'm on LowThresholdNMU and LowThresholdAdoption lists. I guess I should have created a wnpp RFH" bug for all my packages? Not that those really work either (see e.g. #846328, it's still open). So we have established processes, but apparently they don't work as intended. Now we trying to *add* to the set. Maybe we should clean up older processes at the same time because additions just make it even more difficult. XKCD 927 comes to mind [1].
I'm the single maintainer for the following package, only to reflect reality, not because I consider myself "owner". E.g. for years there was a different person in the maintainer field for liferea, but de-facto I was the real maintainer. If people recognize a good team for them, we should make a team maintainer of these:
dbconfig-common -> in the debian namespace liferea -> in the debian namespace viking -> in the debian namespace I'm the only member of the teams maintaining: * cacti and cacti-spine -> in the debian namespace (bit complicated packaging due to upstream vendoring stuff; receives quite some CVE's) * siridb, libcleri, qpack, siridb-connector and siridb-admin -> in the siridb-team namespace, but I'd happily move them to the debian namespace if it would help (I don't expect it would, see dbconfig-common, liferea and viking).Feel free to enable all ci pipelines that work for those packages (I couldn't get cacti to build on salsa last time I tried, would love to see that fixed, I now use debomatic to try run builds). I'm not sure if I receive MR message if somebody would try to create one for these packages.
Paul [1] https://xkcd.com/927/
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
