Dnia 2012-07-01, nie o godzinie 08:24 -0400, Kevin Mark pisze:
> On Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 08:34:01AM +1000, Craig Small wrote:
> > I'd go even further and say that the reason why people start on
> > something generally in Free Software projects is to "scratch their itch"
> > which in Debian could we
On Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 08:34:01AM +1000, Craig Small wrote:
> > "pet projects" as the price we need to pay to make participation in
> > Debian very attractive (not even talking about the role that "pet
> That's a good way of putting it. Also who can predict what is really a
> pet project. I bet
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 04:42:10PM +0200, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> I believe our current way of responding to ITPs for software that
> duplicates the functionality other software that is already in Debian
> is wrong. We have a very lengthy discussion everytime such an ITP
> happen, but usually they ch
Michael Hanke writes ("Re: Improving our response to "duplicate" packages in
Debian"):
> I think this is approaching the problem from the wrong end. Instead of
> preserving the status quo and asking oracles to predict the future we
> should have better means of _remov
Chris Bannister writes:
> Is this [“game-ify”] yet another new word?
It's a neologism, yes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamification>.
--
\“A life spent making mistakes is not only most honorable but |
`\ more useful than a life spent doing nothing.” —anonymous |
_o__)
On Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 08:24:27AM -0400, Kevin Mark wrote:
> Has anyone quantized the % of tasks that a DD/DM does that are outside of
> their
> pet projects? Meaning, once they get their itch scratched, how far outside of
> their main reason for joining Debian, do they explore? Would it be usefu
Hi,
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 08:41:07AM +0200, Michael Hanke wrote:
> I think this is approaching the problem from the wrong end. Instead of
> preserving the status quo and asking oracles to predict the future we
> should have better means of _removing_ software that has proven to be
> inferior of
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 12:18:49PM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> I would go even 1 step further and seek from a perspective maintainer,
> especially a non-DD/DM, at least some assurance that it is not a
> fire-and-forget project for him (e.g. that he is using it extensively
> and planing to do
Le Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 08:24:27AM -0400, Kevin Mark a écrit :
>
> Has anyone quantized the % of tasks that a DD/DM does that are outside of
> their
> pet projects? Meaning, once they get their itch scratched, how far outside of
> their main reason for joining Debian, do they explore? Would it be
On Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 08:34:01AM +1000, Craig Small wrote:
> I'd go even further and say that the reason why people start on
> something generally in Free Software projects is to "scratch their itch"
> which in Debian could well mean packaing your favourite piece of
> software.
Has anyone quanti
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 08:41:07AM +0200, Michael Hanke wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 09:24:25AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > We really need to find better ways to involve new users in core teams,
> > and that means removing from our collective consciousness the idea that
> > you come in D
on other
maintainers.
Thanks.
Prince Annan Koomson.
Sent from my smartphone
-Original Message-
From: Russell Coker
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 8:16
To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Improving our response to "duplicate" packages in Debian
On Sat, 30 Jun 201
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012, Michael Hanke wrote:
> I think this is approaching the problem from the wrong end. Instead of
> preserving the status quo and asking oracles to predict the future we
> should have better means of removing software that has proven to be
> inferior of an equivalent alternative i
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 09:24:25AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 28 juin 2012 à 16:42 +0200, Guus Sliepen a écrit :
> > - Don't immediately start complaining to the submitter of the ITP. Just let
> > the submitter devote his/her energy to packaging.
>
> I don’t think it is worthwile
On Fri, 29 Jun 2012, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> I don’t think it is worthwile to let people devote their energy to
> packaging pet applications that will disappear in 2 years time when they
> find another one.
+1
> We really need to find better ways to involve new users in core teams,
+1
> and
I would go even 1 step further and seek from a perspective maintainer,
especially a non-DD/DM, at least some assurance that it is not a
fire-and-forget project for him (e.g. that he is using it extensively
and planing to do so for the next X years) and that he is willing
to put effort in proper mai
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 09:24:25AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> We really need to find better ways to involve new users in core teams,
> and that means removing from our collective consciousness the idea that
> you come in Debian to package your new favorite piece of software.
Unfortunately dif
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 09:24:25AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 28 juin 2012 à 16:42 +0200, Guus Sliepen a écrit :
> > - Don't immediately start complaining to the submitter of the ITP. Just let
> > the submitter devote his/her energy to packaging.
>
> I don’t think it is worthwil
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 12:55:15AM -0600, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Donnerstag, 28. Juni 2012, Ben Finney wrote:
> > It's part of the job of a (prospective) package maintainer to advocate
> > for the package.
>
> what???
I don't see anything unreasonable about being able to articulate the
reason
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 05:28:45AM +, Bart Martens wrote:
> I'm not convinced that the recent additions to the wiki page reflect consensus
> in this debate. But I appreciate your attempt to summarize this debate on
> that
> wiki page. Maybe we should revert the recent changes on that wiki pa
[Holger Levsen]
> if thats true, I don't want any of my package maintainance jobs. can
> you please fire me?
You've been around awhile. If that is true, you should know how to RFA
or orphan packages and/or retire from the Project. You should know by
now that it isn't up to others to "fire" you.
Le jeudi 28 juin 2012 à 16:42 +0200, Guus Sliepen a écrit :
> - Don't immediately start complaining to the submitter of the ITP. Just let
> the submitter devote his/her energy to packaging.
I don’t think it is worthwile to let people devote their energy to
packaging pet applications that will d
On Donnerstag, 28. Juni 2012, Ben Finney wrote:
> It's part of the job of a (prospective) package maintainer to advocate
> for the package.
what???
if thats true, I don't want any of my package maintainance jobs. can you
please fire me?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 10:51:53PM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> > - Research how many similar software packages are there actually in Debian,
> > in
> > what shape they are, whether they have active upstream and downstream
> > maintainers. Complain about the worst package in that selecti
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 11:24:44AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> Guus Sliepen writes:
>
> > So, I propose our code of conduct when responding to "duplicate
> > software" ITPs should be:
> >
> > - Don't immediately start complaining to the submitter of the ITP. Just let
> > the submitter devote his
> - Research how many similar software packages are there actually in Debian, in
> what shape they are, whether they have active upstream and downstream
> maintainers. Complain about the worst package in that selection instead.
to address Ben's comments and to possibly distill Guus's nice list
Guus Sliepen writes:
> So, I propose our code of conduct when responding to "duplicate
> software" ITPs should be:
>
> - Don't immediately start complaining to the submitter of the ITP. Just let
> the submitter devote his/her energy to packaging.
It's part of the job of a (prospective) package
I really like these suggestions.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120628160643.GB11366@debian
Hi Guus!
Guus Sliepen wrote:
> I believe our current way of responding to ITPs for software that duplicates
> the functionality other software that is already in Debian is wrong.
>
> The worst part is that when we say "but we already have N frobnicators in
> Debian, we don't need an N+1th", we imp
29 matches
Mail list logo
