On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 10:28 PM, Vladimir Stavrinov <vstavri...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 08, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: > >> barrier to entry there: Debian should be a coherent operating system > > Very good. But to keep system in "coherent" state You should not only > build barrier on entry, but also remove packages that break such > coherence. And this should be not only orphaned packages. I am using > Debian for more then 10 years and know, it is big enough to include lot > of garbage.
As I understand it, being orphaned is not a required condition for removal, but rather an argument for removal[1]. You may believe we should consider removals more often, and that would be a valid concern, but it's not what is being discussed here. > So I don't understand, why do You think my package is worse of > those garbage and how it break "coherence". That's nonsense. Once a package enters the archive, it's not trivial to get rid of it. It's thus reasonable that we want to make sure packages are in good shape for entry in Debian. It's also natural that we want to improve the quality of the distributed software over time. We have higher standards for packages entering the archive now, and that's great for the distribution. >> Instead, you should make these works available to people as Debian >> packages, but not argue for their inclusion *in* Debian until they have >> demonstrated a track record of being useful to numerous Debian users and > > What You mean? How to do this? And were this "track record" will be > seen? It is already available as Debian packages on sourceforge. And > what further? "numerous Debian users" will seek it there? It sound like > demagogy. You don't need to package a software outside Debian as a precondition for inclusion in Debian. I think what Ben means is that Debian shouldn't be treated as a simple distribution channel. Remember that packaging for Debian is a way to contribute to Debian and its community. Although it brings exposure to the upstream projects as a side-effect, packaging for Debian is an end in itself. Please note I don't mean to infer the reasoning behind your desire to contribute to Debian. >> That's getting it backward. Instead, maintain them as publicly-available >> works, ensure their maintenance as distinct useful packages, and only >> then advocate for their inclusion in Debian. > > Hey, what do You talking about? I don't sell You elephant or space > shuttle. It is only tiny shell script as simple as toy. As we already mentioned in the original thread, every single package uploaded to the archive brings a maintenance overhead that is not directly linked to the package maintainer. By comparing your package to a toy, you're grossly simplifying the consequences of the inclusion of a package that may not be fit for Debian. > This way You can kill any desire to join Debian. I begin understand > something. I remember, few Years ago one Japanese employer refuse accept > me for only one reason, because I like Debian too much. Nobody here intends to discourage contribution. The review process is part of improving the quality of the packages we ship. Understanding and accepting that is key to getting your package sponsored. If your package doesn't adhere to our quality standards, it probably shouldn't be uploaded. I understand your frustration, but there's no way around the review process. [1]: http://ftp-master.debian.org/removals.html Regards, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/canvyna_kko59bdfz1_gwuzhblvfpsxzbd5urvfzqsbpkpda...@mail.gmail.com
