On 19/08/25 at 21:59 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi Lucas, > > Am Sun, Aug 17, 2025 at 11:37:42PM +0200 schrieb Lucas Nussbaum: > > > One point raised during the BoF was the need to better document the role > > > of the Debian/ group on Salsa. Not all developers are aware that being > > > part of this group allows any DD to upload packages hosted there. While > > > this is already documented in the Wiki about Salsa[d05], it might be > > > worth mentioning in the Developers Reference to make it more > > > discoverable (patches welcome). > > [...] > > > [d04] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2024/12/msg00101.html > > > [d05] > > > https://wiki.debian.org/Salsa/Doc#Collaborative_Maintenance:_.22Debian.22_group > > > > Where is that (= "being part of this group allows any DD to upload > > packages hosted there") documented in [d05]? The word "upload" is > > not included in the section of [d05] you link to. > > That’s true — the word “upload” is missing from that page. But several > people I talked to share the interpretation that upload rights are > implied. If I’m not mistaken, we even have a DebConf talk recording > where Jonathan Carter said so explicitly. > > For me, this is exactly the problem: currently we rely on oral > tradition, interpretations, or scattered references rather than clear > written rules. This is why I suggested that the role of the Debian/ > group should be documented better, ideally in the Developers Reference, > so there is no room for contradictory readings.
Maybe, instead than retrofitting a policy on the debian salsa group, a good way to both clarify the situation and allow an opt-in mechanism would be to create another group on salsa, with rules clearly defined from the start, and let maintainers decide of the maintenance model they want for the package they currently maintain. After all it's very simple to move projects between groups in salsa, and just requires an upload to update the VCS fields. Lucas
