On 2025-05-08 10:00 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
Am Wed, May 07, 2025 at 10:27:03PM +0200 schrieb Jonas Smedegaard:
Can we please stop calling it an intent to NMU when it is invasive?You're right--"Intent To NMU" is a misleading name for this. I'd gladly adopt a better term, and I appreciate any honest suggestion. Naming is hard, so thanks for helping.
ITM Modernise ITU Update
ITR Revamp move-to-collective-maintainership (failing to think a good short name here - maybe:) ITC Collectivise ? ITPM Publically Maintain I think the underlying tension here is that this is really about moving the package from a strong-maintainer model to a collective-maintainship model, and that is still somewhat controversial. Like Jonas I really don't think re-use of 'NMU' is appropriate here. I wouldn't put it quite as strongly as he did (that seemed rather too aggressive, when we know Andreas is a decent chap, trying to help), but I agree with his points. The move from archive to git+salsa is significant and whilst it _is_ reversible that would be work (and I think 'going backwards' like this would be disapproved-of by quite a chunk of DMs/DDs) so it's quite a one-way thing in practice, which is why 'NMU' (under existing rules) is definitely the wrong name. So long as the maintainer really is long-gone/disinterested this process makes sense, but if there _is_ still a willing maintainer then Jonas' reaction is quite right - it's a big imposition/change and definitelynot just an 'NMU'.
Giving it a name that makes clear the status-change of the package should avoid confusion and argument. Of the various names I think 'Revamp' might actually be the best, as it avoids the value-judgement implicit in 'Update' and 'Modernise'. And in 10 years time it could be re-used for some other significant packaging change when we have moved on to new debates. 'Collectivise' perhaps gets to the underlying issue better, but is perhaps too specific to this _particular_ revamping, and would look silly in a decade or two when we have other issues. So yeah, please pick a better name, and be mindful that 'collectivising' packages is a big change, even if it feels like a simple 'updating' to those already in that world. Wookey -- Principal hats: Debian, Wookware http://wookware.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
