Hi Timo, On Sat, Aug 26, 2023 at 01:32:25AM +0200, Timo Röhling wrote: > Practically, lifting the moratorium means that the CTTE relinquishes > control of the /usr-merge transition to whoever drives the > transition, i.e., maintains that living document and thereby makes > decisions on how to proceed.
Yes. > Who is this going to be? Do you, Helmut, feel comfortable as driver? Yes, though I'm not opposed to sharing the load. > Do you prefer if the Release Team takes over with you in an advisory > role? If you continue as main driver, should the DPL formally > delegate that role somehow? Isn't this "just" a transition? I mean it's a larger one spanning multiple releases and it's one that will not migrate to testing in one step, but other than that, it is a change affecting many packages in a coordinated way which is what we usually call transition. A transition bug probably is a good idea, but other than that, transitions are usually managed by those doing the work without exercising constitutional powers. I sincerely hope that we as a project can get this done in a consensual way without requiring the use of constitutional mechanisms to make it work. Yes, there have been a lot of bad feelings and even questionable actions and so forth about this, but on a lot of sides I also see an interest to listen to each other and cooperation. People who formerly have indicated to be too annoyed by this matter to consider discussing it start doing so again. Why not try another time to put trust in our community? The worst thing that could happen seems to be us messing up the transition and making some systems unbootable until we figure out a solution. Given dumat, we can likely keep that out of trixie. If things fail that way, we can still consider the use of more constitutional powers, but I'd rather see us getting done without needing them. On a micro level, the Release Team will be involved. The plan is for me to file RC bugs. There will be disagreement about such bugs and the Release Team is the arbiter of severities and testing migration here. > I think these are questions we need answered, because it would be > advisable to have someone with clearly defined responsibilities at > the wheel for the transition. Otherwise, we risk stale-mating > ourselves with endless debates on how to finish the transition > "properly". I'm surprised. We did have some contentious questions such as whether changing dpkg would be part of the solution and how the bootstrap protocol should look like. These seem settled now. Beyond these, the feedback mostly was that we should simply get it done. We will still see individual disagreements on particular packages, but those cannot be settled by some form of delegation as in effect they touch the package ownership and overriding that currently requires CTTE involvement. I'd rather see us not using the constitution hammer just because we see a nail and hope that I'm right about the expected cooperation. Helmut
