Hallo Michael, I have to chime in as I probably encouraged Phil for this RFS.
On Fri, 3 Jan 2020 22:26:35 -0600 Michael Lustfield < mich...@lustfield.net> wrote: > Thanks for your interest contributing to Debian. > > Unfortunately, the packages you built are not DFSG-free and have additional > problems that would prevent them from being included in Debian. Check out the > lintian warnings, ideally with "lintian -EviIL +pedantic *.changes". > typically does a good job predicting whether or not a package will find a > sponsor and/or pass NEW. This is actually the reason why we have the sponsoring process to help people understanding the processes and requirements of contributiong to Debian. We do not expect, especially on new contributors that they know everything from the first upload already. Frankly, imho, your language is not well suited to encourage new contributors.... Looking at the packages, the lintian situation is not that bad, I have seen worse even in the archives. imho the correct procedure would have been to mark this bug "wontfix" or "moreinfo" as per https://wiki.debian.org/Mentors/BTS. Closing it seems a bit rough. > Fortunately, these packages are already present in Debian and are being > actively maintained. If you would like to contribute, you should reach out to > the current maintainer to discuss collaborative maintenance. The maintainer chimed in in #947270#30 saying that he would appreciate help because of ETIME. Depending on > their time, they may be willing to review/sponsor your updates to the > package. > > https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/filezilla > https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/libfilezilla > https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/gnome-maps (I did not find a RFS for the last one) > > FWIW- > I noticed that this is not the first time you've submitted this sort of bug. > > You should be aware that working *with* the current maintainer is the ideal way > to begin contributing to a maintained packages. An NMU (non- maintainer upload) > is one of those last resort options, typically reserved for unreachable > maintainers or urgent issues. You saw that Phil was doing an Team Upload? Both packages are in the debian namepsace on salsa, thus a team upload is completly in order. [1] (Of course it is always good to talk to each other.) [1] https://wiki.debian.org/Salsa/Doc#Collaborative_Maintenance:_.22Debian.22_group > When you don't work with the package maintainer and instead just try to build > updates and have others upload, it circumvents said maintainer. Ths is why > this particular type of behavior is often seen as an attempt at a "hostile > takeover" of the package. Neither of the both packages has a change in maintainer ship recorded, so there is no package hijacking. It is a team upload as documented in the changelog. Of course a question to ask in the RFS is, espescially if there are bigger changes, are if the sponsoree have checked with the recorded maintainer and in best case to establish a link between them. At least this is what I would have done while marking the bug "moreinfo" > I'm sure that wasn't you're intention and suspect you're attempting to follow > a process for packages that are not yet in Debian. In most cases, if you didn't > file an ITP, you won't be filing an RFS. > -- tobi
