Hi Ian,
thanks a lot for your super fast reply!
Am Sat, Dec 14, 2024 at 11:11:55PM +0000 schrieb Ian Jackson:
>
> One concern I have is that, err, how to put this: I think some people
> may consider xfonts-traditional "obsolete" or "cruft" or "wrong" or
> something. If you're confident that those kind of issues aren't going
> to arise then, please carry on.
The package has non-zero popcon, is not in Git, and has no bugs labeling
it as "obsolete," "cruft," or "wrong." Moving it to Salsa under the
Fonts team would allow broader contributions and oversight. The team can
evaluate and, if necessary, propose its removal as the best course of
action.
> Regardless, I very much welcome the admin work you are doing here and
> am happy to have the repo hosted on salsa.
:-)
> I trust you have found the package's proper git history, despite the
> lack of vcs-git headers? dgit fetch will have it, plus any NMU(s).
I initially followed my `gbp import-dsc` habit (and should have known
its not the best choice in this case :-() and thus recreated the history
from dgit. The repository in Salsa now contains the complete dgit
history.
> IDK what the fonts team's policy is about Uploaders etc., but I would
> like to continue to be informed, at least, about plans for this
> package, without having to subscribe to and monitor a more general
> list.
I'm personally not subscribed to any package from the fonts team
myself and I see your problem here. I'm personally not really happy
about the default BTS behaviour to send mails only to Maintainer
but not to Uploaders. So I see two options:
1. You subscribe the package directly in tracker
2. I can move the package to the debian/ team and set you as
Maintainer
I have no strong feelings about both options. My main focus is to have
the package on Salsa and clearly open for everybody to contribute. The
Fonts team looked like a sensible choice but I fully understand that you
do not want your mailbox filled up with information about other fonts
packages.
> > PS: I remember that you wanted me to use dgit for the psutils upload.
> > I confirm I'll do so in case you might accept the ITS. ;-)
>
> Thanks. My opinion is that all uploads should be done with dgit where
> possible. But I don't feel entitled to request this unless I'm the
> maintainer, or something.
I'm fine to learn more so I will do so once we clarified the best
option in what team the package should be maintained.
Thanks again for your quick response (which is unfortunately a very
rare exception for ITS bugs)
Andreas.
--
https://fam-tille.de
