Re: please upload python2.6 to unstable
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 08:56:08AM +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote: > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 08:39, Andreas Tille wrote: > > I have no idea what makes you think that even more angry mails on public > > mailing list will solve the problem. > Be quiet won't solve it either, sadly. That's proved by the long > silent period that provides not advance on the python > maintainership-side. At least i'm proposing to form a group (and be > part of that) to take over maintainership. A group hijack is still a hijack. I don't know why you try to make this sound like some sort of noble enterprise for the good of Debian. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: please upload python2.6 to unstable
Il giorno mar, 12/01/2010 alle 00.06 -0800, Steve Langasek ha scritto: > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 08:56:08AM +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 08:39, Andreas Tille wrote: > > > I have no idea what makes you think that even more angry mails on public > > > mailing list will solve the problem. > > > Be quiet won't solve it either, sadly. That's proved by the long > > silent period that provides not advance on the python > > maintainership-side. At least i'm proposing to form a group (and be > > part of that) to take over maintainership. > > A group hijack is still a hijack. I don't know why you try to make this > sound like some sort of noble enterprise for the good of Debian. > I'm certainly not a guru, but I never thought a hijack can't be noble and in particular for the good of Debian... pointers? Pietro signature.asc Description: Questa è una parte del messaggio firmata digitalmente
Re: please upload python2.6 to unstable
Le mardi 12 janvier 2010 à 00:06 -0800, Steve Langasek a écrit : > A group hijack is still a hijack. I don't know why you try to make this > sound like some sort of noble enterprise for the good of Debian. It doesn’t have to be noble. But it is often useful nevertheless. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette : :' : `. `' “You did never write something helpful `- besides your trolling” -- Jörg Schilling -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: please upload python2.6 to unstable
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 12:06:09AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > A group hijack is still a hijack. I don't know why you try to make this > sound like some sort of noble enterprise for the good of Debian. I never said it is a noble enterprise. I would simply call it common sense that a group should not allow a single person to block an important package. After such a long time of ignorance by not replying to any mail it is IMHO fair enouth to give the (non)Maintainer a time of 7 days to stop the attempt. The alternative is to ask the TC but if you ask me the resulting decision of the TC is quite obvious and it is common sense as well to save TC peoples time. But for sure, I might be wrong Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: please upload python2.6 to unstable
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 09:17:44AM +0100, Pietro Battiston wrote: > Il giorno mar, 12/01/2010 alle 00.06 -0800, Steve Langasek ha scritto: > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 08:56:08AM +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 08:39, Andreas Tille wrote: > > > > I have no idea what makes you think that even more angry mails on public > > > > mailing list will solve the problem. > > > Be quiet won't solve it either, sadly. That's proved by the long > > > silent period that provides not advance on the python > > > maintainership-side. At least i'm proposing to form a group (and be > > > part of that) to take over maintainership. > > A group hijack is still a hijack. I don't know why you try to make this > > sound like some sort of noble enterprise for the good of Debian. > I'm certainly not a guru, but I never thought a hijack can't be noble > and in particular for the good of Debian... pointers? Really? Here are some other words that go hand-in-hand with 'package hijack': - vigilante - antisocial - arrogant - acrimonious - disrespectful - demotivating We have consensual processes for taking over unmaintained packages via the QA Team, and we have processes of last resort to reasssign packages via the Technical Committee if a maintainer is unwilling to give up the package. There's no excuse for hijacking packages, and it's poisonous to the atmosphere of the project. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: please upload python2.6 to unstable
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 09:06, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 08:56:08AM +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 08:39, Andreas Tille wrote: >> > I have no idea what makes you think that even more angry mails on public >> > mailing list will solve the problem. > >> Be quiet won't solve it either, sadly. That's proved by the long >> silent period that provides not advance on the python >> maintainership-side. At least i'm proposing to form a group (and be >> part of that) to take over maintainership. > > A group hijack is still a hijack. I don't know why you try to make this > sound like some sort of noble enterprise for the good of Debian. Where did I talk about hijack? If I wanted that, I'd have already done. 'take over' can be a wide concept: - form a team that contains Matthias and collaboratively maintain python - form a team that does not contain Matthias and collaboratively maintain python - ask the ctte to decide who's to maintain python, the new group or the current maint (that's what I was referring with "pushed further" in the initial reply) - something else What I (and many other people) want is a properly maintained python package, which is not now. Regards, -- Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu) My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: please upload python2.6 to unstable
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 09:24:49AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > I never said it is a noble enterprise. I was responding to Sandro. > I would simply call it common sense that a group should not allow a single > person to block an important package. After such a long time of ignorance > by not replying to any mail it is IMHO fair enouth to give the > (non)Maintainer a time of 7 days to stop the attempt. As log as you leave it as the maintainer's prerogative to nack the takeover, then that's fine. > The alternative is to ask the TC but if you ask me the resulting decision > of the TC is quite obvious and it is common sense as well to save TC > peoples time. Why do you think it's appropriate for anyone other than the TC to say what the TC would decide? If your position is that it's "obvious" that the TC would confirm Sandro as the new maintainer of python, then based on a sample size of one TC member, I would disagree. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: please upload python2.6 to unstable
Il giorno mar, 12/01/2010 alle 02.37 -0800, Steve Langasek ha scritto: > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 09:17:44AM +0100, Pietro Battiston wrote: > > Il giorno mar, 12/01/2010 alle 00.06 -0800, Steve Langasek ha scritto: > > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 08:56:08AM +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 08:39, Andreas Tille wrote: > > > > > I have no idea what makes you think that even more angry mails on > > > > > public > > > > > mailing list will solve the problem. > > > > > Be quiet won't solve it either, sadly. That's proved by the long > > > > silent period that provides not advance on the python > > > > maintainership-side. At least i'm proposing to form a group (and be > > > > part of that) to take over maintainership. > > > > A group hijack is still a hijack. I don't know why you try to make this > > > sound like some sort of noble enterprise for the good of Debian. > > > I'm certainly not a guru, but I never thought a hijack can't be noble > > and in particular for the good of Debian... pointers? > > Really? > > Here are some other words that go hand-in-hand with 'package hijack': > > - vigilante > - antisocial > - arrogant > - acrimonious > - disrespectful > - demotivating Uhm, in our situation I doubt about the others, and I clearly feel "demotivating" is as far as possible from the truth. > > We have consensual processes for taking over unmaintained packages via the > QA Team, and we have processes of last resort to reasssign packages via the > Technical Committee if a maintainer is unwilling to give up the package. > There's no excuse for hijacking packages, and it's poisonous to the > atmosphere of the project. > QA team is clearly not a solution, and I don't see how the TC should be able to reach the same goal and in the meantime reconcile the spirits. I would have probably imagined the opposite... but it must certainly be because of my limited experience. Thanks for the clarification. Pietro signature.asc Description: Questa è una parte del messaggio firmata digitalmente
Re: please upload python2.6 to unstable
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 02:37:49AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > Really? > > Here are some other words that go hand-in-hand with 'package hijack': > > - vigilante > - antisocial > - arrogant > - acrimonious > - disrespectful > - demotivating Are you really sure that these attributes will not fit even more to a maintainer who ignores his users and fellow maintainers? Again: Telling a maintainer "We will hijack your package after time x if you will not tell us to stay away from this." and waiting for the time gives the maintainer an urgent warning. He can perfectly say: Don't do it and after this we might consult the TC. Is "telling about an impending hijack" a problem for you? If the maintainer stays silent also to this I do not know in how far the attributes above apply to the hijack. Perhaps my dictionary is broken and I just can not understand the wording. > We have consensual processes for taking over unmaintained packages via the > QA Team, and we have processes of last resort to reasssign packages via the > Technical Committee if a maintainer is unwilling to give up the package. But the maintainer did not issued his will about the package - at least I have not seen any hint. > There's no excuse for hijacking packages, and it's poisonous to the > atmosphere of the project. A hijack is done if a package is uploaded with changed maintainer field. I was suggesting a warning that this will happen in a determined future if the maintainer does not insist. That's actually not a hijack but putting some preasure which is obviosely needed to force some action. IMHO it is equivalent to bothering the TC but less formal because TC will be only involved in case the maintainer disagrees and continues to do a bad job. It might also be that the maintainer understands the warning. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: please upload python2.6 to unstable
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 02:59:35AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > As log as you leave it as the maintainer's prerogative to nack the takeover, > then that's fine. Sure. That's what I intended to say when I said: "... if I do not hear from you until 7 days I assume you agree." > > The alternative is to ask the TC but if you ask me the resulting decision > > of the TC is quite obvious and it is common sense as well to save TC > > peoples time. > > Why do you think it's appropriate for anyone other than the TC to say what > the TC would decide? I assumed that the TC would come to a similar conclusion as the majority of people on debian-python an debian-devel (last month). > If your position is that it's "obvious" that the TC would confirm Sandro as > the new maintainer of python, then based on a sample size of one TC member, > I would disagree. I rather assumed that the TC would agree that Python should be maintained by a *group* of maintainers which consists of Matthias, Sandro and perhaps others who seemed heavily involved. And I even stronger assumed that the TC would vote for a change of the current situation. But as I said as well I might be wrong here. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Bug#543689: please upload python2.6 to unstable
On 12.01.2010 03:08, Mr. Foobarra wrote: > (CC'd, since it is not obvious to the casual bystander if Matthias > reads bug reports or mailing lists) > > Dear Mr. Klose, > > I have grown woefully tired of watching respected developers ask > nicely, tiptoe around, get angry, ask again after waiting a few > weeks, and continue to make every attempt to give you every benefit > of the doubt. This upload is way overdue and was requested formally > in the BTS August 26, 2009 - with no response from you. The information is there, it is unfortunately just well hidden: http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2009/12/msg00207.html Cheers, Bastian -- Bastian Venthur http://venthur.de Debian Developer venthur at debian org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Bug#543689: please upload python2.6 to unstable
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 12:21:34PM +0100, Bastian Venthur wrote: > The information is there, it is unfortunately just well hidden: > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2009/12/msg00207.html Ahh, that's a good catch. I can not tell whether the technical arguing is correct but at least it gives some sign of activity. On the other hand it shows that Matthias is ignorant about relevant communication channels (like for instance CCing debian-python) and relies on communication proxies as Bastian. This does not sound promissing for team maintenance. :-( Kind regards Andreas. BTW: I deleted any CCs because of Debian mailing list policy and hope that Matthias is recieving mails from this list ... -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Bug#543689: please upload python2.6 to unstable
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 13:44, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 12:21:34PM +0100, Bastian Venthur wrote: >> The information is there, it is unfortunately just well hidden: >> >> http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2009/12/msg00207.html > > Ahh, that's a good catch. I can not tell whether the technical arguing > is correct but at least it gives some sign of activity. On the other > hand it shows that Matthias is ignorant about relevant communication > channels (like for instance CCing debian-python) and relies on > communication proxies as Bastian. Also, that's something not communicated/agreed/decided in concert with the python apps/modules teams. Additionally removing py2.4 before adding py2.6 only introduces a delay in py2.6 wide-availability with very few (if any) advantages over removing it after or at teh same time of py2.6 addition. > This does not sound promissing for > team maintenance. :-( you start seeing what I mean Regards, -- Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu) My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Bug#561316: postr: diff for NMU version 0.12.3-1.1
Hi Ross, On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 09:10, Ross Burton wrote: > On Mon, 2010-01-11 at 23:30 +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote: >> Please also consider joining the PAPT [1] and maintain the package with us. >> >> [1] http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/PythonAppsPackagingTeam/ > > I was previously the upstream maintainer too but have passed that on to > someone else. I'd welcome the PAPT taking over packaging entirely. Thanks for your offer! I'm adding d-python in the loop, so that some guys there might take over the package. You might also consider filing a RFA bug, if you're no more interested in this package. Cheers, -- Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu) My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
