Andreas Tille <ti...@debian.org> writes: > However, if maintainers decide from deriving what several people > consider good practice of team maintenance and put extra work on me > (like creating an extra public repository) I'm not willing to do this.
I'm sorry to say that I am not clear on what that sentence means; I got lost around “decide from deriving”. The distributed nature of Git – choosing how to share commits between repositories – is a core feature, and allows collaboration without requiring access to the same filesystem. As a maintainer of the package, I remain open to pull requests. > There was a longish discussion on Debian Project[1] and my reading of > it was that named person maintenance is not the prefered way. You have said that you “consider it sensible” to maintain a package within DPMT, and I have no objection to that position. The discussion thread you point to has many opinions, some of them in support of nominating a team as package maintainer. I have no objection to that position. Are you now expressing the separate position that you consider it *not* sensible to name an individual as package maintainer? On what basis? In the discussion thread you point to, I don't see anything to support that. -- \ “[H]ow deep can a truth be — indeed, how true can it be — if it | `\ is not built from facts?” —Kathryn Schulz, 2015-10-19 | _o__) | Ben Finney
