On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 02:36:49PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote: > [-devel and -vote CCed. Please respect the Mail-Followup-To -project. > You should really subscribe to -project, it's not that big. In any case, > I will try read and reply to any comment]
Thanks Michael for taking the time to do this. As you know, i am not really convinced that this is really a good thing in the long run, but let's see what will happen. > 2. The proposed implementation for non-free.org. > > Basically, there are two possibilities, a) using a GForge service and b) > reproducing the debian.org services, but in a less complex way, where > possible. I would vote for b), since it would cause the less difference of use over the current system. > B. Reproducing the debian.org services. What is mostly needed are the > Debian archive itself, the BTS, mailing-lists and the PTS. > > a) The archive. This has been taken care of already, as Daniel Stone's > box already features a katie installation. No mirror though, what about backups ? Not everyone has personal backups, and i at least somewhat was relying on the archive to store the packages, especially at times of limited disk space (like when trying to build X :). > b) The Bug Tracking System. Other projects (e.g. mutt) are using it, > there is a package for it around, it should be rather easy to setup. > The hard part would be to import the current bugs from non-free > packages to the non-free.org BTS. One solution would be to copy the > entire BTS and then removing archived bugs and the bugs for packages > in main. Like said, migration of bugs between non-free and debian would be problematic, we can make do for now though, but i believe that this will also be problematic for DD receiving eroned bug reports. I fear these bug reports, or at least a proportion thereof may simply get lost if the transition method is too involved. I don't know if this would be significant though. > c) The Package Tracking System. I talked to Raphael Hertzog about this > a while ago. The code for the PTS is available and he told me that > it should be possible to adopt it for something like non-free.org > within an acceptable time frame. I'm not quite sure how hard it will > be to transfer the current subscribers to non-free packages. Still, no more single per maintainer page where both non-free, contrib and main packages are visible, i guess :( BTW, what about contrib ? Will it move to non-free or stay in debian ? > One problem with the transition that has been identified is the > reassignment of bugs from non-free packages back to main packages. The > easy solution here would be to just open a new bug on the main package, > with the full bug log from non-free.org attached. Maybe a better > solution can be hashed out in the future, if this case proves to be > quite common. Ok. I don't think this is only a transition problem though, but will also be felt later on. > Another outstanding issue is the handling of the non-free.org keyring. > We believe it should be kept synced with the debian keyring and other > people should be added only after good consideration. Whether this > amounts to a full-blown NM process will have to be seen. Ok, but given this and other remark, i have some serious doubts how this separate project could be seen as somthing other than related to the debian project, and officially approved by it. I also again wonder if the effort going into this would not be better spent in a more useful way, but hey, if you can bring this trough, more power to you. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
