El 21/11/08 07:19 Reinhard Tartler escribió: > Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > El 23/04/08 06:09 Fabian Greffrath escribió: > >> I believe we could start merging the efforts of both the > >> pkg-multimedia-maintainers and the debian-multimedia groups into one > >> bigger project, although the current scopes of both projects are > >> slightly different. Since this has allready been suggested today, I'd > >> like to hear some other (Hello, team members!) opinions about it. > > > > Hello all. This discussion died without any further action towards > > merging both teams. I re-brought it up a few days ago at the > > debian-multimedia list[1], and the general consensus (ie, 2 other people) > > is that they should be merged. Now, re-reading this particular thread, it > > seems that the pkg-multimedia team didn't have anything against it. So, > > lets work out a way to move forward. > > Yes, I still have that thread 'ticked', but I have to admit that I was > too busy/lazy to actually answer it. Sorry for that. > > Let me please think aloud. I'm currently looking at the package lists: > > http://qa.debian.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://qa.debian.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED] >lioth.debian.org > > both are pretty impressive lists. I think I didn't even touch half the > packages of pkg-multimedia, and didn't even really look inside the > packages of debian-multimedia. Furthermore I have to admit that in the > past, I've mainly cared for ffmpeg and sponsored from time to time > people from pkg-multimedia.
This is something missing from the d-m team at this point. DD manpower to sponsor non-DD contributors. Although true collaboration would be ideal, it is a first step towards that. > > To me at least the pkg-multimedia team is a bit similar to the Debian QA > Team. There is a pool of packages that are cared for by interested > people. In the pkg-multimedia team, I don't think we have maintained a > list with 'active' team members, but more or less 'hoped' that bugs are > fixed by members of the team that cared. I don't feel there is strong > commitment by the team member for all packages, but the respective > maintainers all have their 'pet' packages. > > In the end, what does merging the team mean to me? For me, it is > enlarging the pool of potential people that potentially touch the > package. This doesn't need to be a bad think, but realistically, we could > have the same with using the alioth 'collab-maint' "project", no? I think you answered yourself that question with your next paragraph: > > Still having a (common) dedicated multimedia maintainer's team would > group a set of people interested in a set of related packages. I think > this is a desirable goal. Having a common list is motivating. Activity generates more activity, IME. Collab-maint doesn't create this effect. > > > First of all, the bikeshed :) : which list and name to use. It was > > suggested that debian-multimedia be kept as a discussion list about > > multimedia in debian, and pkg-multimedia for the maintainership of > > packages. While it sounds nice at first, I think it doesn't make much > > sense. At least nobody has been using any of both lists for that purpose. > > I think it should be better if only one list would be kept. I'm not sure > > what kind of "general" discussion was expected in the d-m list. The kde > > in debian lists (which follow this dual-list model) show that the > > "general discussion" one ended up pretty much dead. I also think that > > Debian Multimedia Team is a cooler name. > > I disagree. The Debian Games Team follow the same dual-list approach. It > turns out that the pkg- list, that listed in the maintainer field is > pretty crowded with bug mail, while the "general discussion" list is > pretty much well used for general discussion. > > I think the same could work with the "common" multimedia team as well: > > debian-multimedia@lists.debian.org: "General Discussion" > [EMAIL PROTECTED]: "bug flow, etc" > > However, I wouldn't mind if the pkg-multimedia-maint list would set a > Mail-Follow-Up to header to debian-multimedia@ in order to focus > discussion. Hmm, so what would be the point of pkg-multimedia-maint if mails are answered to debian-multimedia? > > > Second, VCS coordination. From what I can see, pkg-multimedia uses svn. > > d-m also uses svn, but is slowly moving towards git. Is there any > > interest in the p-m people to move to git? I fear that there is no > > interest in d-m to move back so svn (am I right in this?). My personal > > choice would be git, FWIW. > > I'm not that happy with svn either, but when Sam founded pkg-multimedia, > he told me he has chosen svn because that would attract most people as > svn is the common denominator most people understand. I don't disagree > with him here. But I also think that this plan didn't work out too > well. In effect I think we don't have more than 4, perhaps 5 people that > are actually doing work in pkg-multimedia, and I would be surprised if > more than half of these people actually favour svn. > > I personally favour bzr. but I think I could perhaps do with git as > well. What I think is way more important than the question which DVCS we > choose is the exact method we use for maintaining the package. I've > given that matter some thought and even wrote a wiki page about that: > > http://wiki.tauware.de/misc:vcs-packaging > http://wiki.tauware.de/misc:vcs-packaging2 You might want to look at vcs-pkg.org > > Moreover various people have explained their details on how to handle > patches with a DVCS, and with git in particular. The nice thing about > svn here is that you don't have that much choice (because svn does not > offer similar features at all) and discussion on that is avoided. So if > we want to move to git, we must document very carefully the exact way > how to use to tool git. Agreed. Uniformity is key for collaboration across packages. > > > Administrative merging of the teams (ie, removing demudi or > > pkg-multimedia from alioth to use only one) should be done at least right > > after squeeze (since packages in lenny will point to both places). > > Agreed. > > > As a side note, I think we have 2 special packages in pkg-multimedia, > namely ffmpeg-debian/ffmpeg and vlc. I think we should somehow make it > clear that they are special. However that should not be the main concern > for the matter of this discussion, I just wanted to point out that they > are special maintenance wise. Why are they special? Saludos, Felipe Sateler
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
