Quoting Simon Josefsson (2026-08-16 13:40:04) > Jonas Smedegaard <[email protected]> writes: > > >> I disagree -- and think this is at the core of what proper "team" > >> maintainance of packages could be. > >> > >> To me, team maintainance would be one where the team as a collective > >> take responsibility for a package, but no individual person insists on > >> the ego-boost of assigning personal ownership of the outcome, and > >> through social means of the Uploader field signal that others should not > >> feel the same level of ownership. > > > > Do you mean "could be" and "would be" as future tense? > > Yes. > > > I am not simply nitpicking here - I genuinely find it quite confusing > > to mix in speculations about future Debian into a conversation about > > current rules in Debian. > > Right, sorry for adding to that confusion. > > I can't claim to understand what the current policy really is, or how it > is supposed to be implemented. I'm not sure the MIA team post makes > that a lot more clearer either. What seems clear is that the field is > not handled in a consistent way across the project, and the policies > around the fields could be clarified further. So I jumped into > improvement mode, and wanted to take a step back and questioning the > basics. I'm not sure we'll be able to find consensus on this topic > easily, but I think the current situation around Maintainer/Uploader > fields has a social dimension that affects long-term sustainability of > Debian so it is worthy of discussion.
I agree that it is worthy of discussion whether our current rules make sense to us or they need changing. Please feel free to start such discussion - but separately from this conversation, please. This conversation is about clarifying our current rules, not which different rules we might want instead, some day, if we can reach a consensus on it. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ * Sponsorship: https://ko-fi.com/drjones [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
