Wouter Verhelst:
On Sat, Oct 08, 2022 at 08:06:33AM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
[...]
OK, thanks. This was the reason why I added that disclaimer at the top
of my previous email; if the release team doesn't want to do the work
(which would be completely reasonable!) then obviously we'd have to
c
I myself am *very* happy to have other Debian people (DDs, DMs) git
push and dput fixes to any of "my" packages. No need for an MNU or
delay or permission: just do it. Zero friction. In the unlikely event
you do something I'm uncomfortable with I'll just revert it and
discuss.
This has nothing to
On Sat, Oct 08, 2022 at 08:06:33AM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> > Here are things I think the RT style composition has going for it.
> >
> > [... long list of praise for the RT ...]
> >
>
> Hi,
>
> I agree that the RT has a long list of pros for this role. However, I feel
> this
On Fri, Oct 07, 2022 at 09:13:56PM +0200, Timo Röhling wrote:
> * Wouter Verhelst [2022-10-07 19:58]:
> > I'm not sure I agree with that assessment. I believe DEPs are mostly for
> > discussing changes that can then be voluntarily implemented by
> > individual package maintainers; whereas this is
Hi,
Debian does not have a good way to manage projects that require changes
to large numbers of source packages to be successful. Handling projects
like that currently requires buy-in from each individual package
maintainer; if the project does not manage to convince sufficient
numbers of maintai
[...]
Here are things I think the RT style composition has going for it.
[... long list of praise for the RT ...]
>
Hi,
I agree that the RT has a long list of pros for this role. However, I
feel this discussing is overlooking one vital detail. Namely that the RT
is a thankless job of endle
6 matches
Mail list logo
