From: Don Armstrong Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 20:10:09 +0000 (-0800) Subject: move resolved issues to the resolved issues subdirectory X-Git-Url: https://git.donarmstrong.com/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=9e82a0ae741895e4c0083f8966602f8f88f46eff;p=debian-ctte.git move resolved issues to the resolved issues subdirectory --- diff --git a/681783_recommends_in_metapackages/681783_recommends_in_metapackages.org b/681783_recommends_in_metapackages/681783_recommends_in_metapackages.org deleted file mode 100644 index 954ba62..0000000 --- a/681783_recommends_in_metapackages/681783_recommends_in_metapackages.org +++ /dev/null @@ -1,15 +0,0 @@ -* Issue http://bugs.debian.org/681783 http://bugs.debian.org/681834 -** gnome-core Depends: on network-manager which prevents network-manager from being easily replaced with wicd or similar -** Are Depends: appropriate for metapackages -** Is running with recommends off supported -* Possible Solutions -** Punt to policy -** Ian to write up statement about Recommends -* Open Questions -** Appears to be general instead of specific to network-manager and the gnome metapackage -* Proposed Resolutions -** http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/20514.35772.350203.926582@chiark.greenend.org.uk -** http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/87k3x9royz.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu -* Adopted Resolution -* Involved Parties -** gnome-core@packages.debian.org, 681834@bugs.debian.org, 681783@bugs.debian.org diff --git a/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/decision b/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/decision deleted file mode 100644 index b8fc3c5..0000000 --- a/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/decision +++ /dev/null @@ -1,104 +0,0 @@ -wip wip wip do not use - -===== TITLE - -Dependency from gnome-core to network-manager - -===== WEB SUMMARY - -gnome-core should Recommend, not Depend, on network-manager -(overrule maintainer). - -===== EMAIL INTRO - -The dependency from gnome-core to network-manager (via -network-manager-gnome) was referred to the Technical Committee. - -The TC has made the following decision: - -===== DECISION - -Whereas: - -1. The gnome-core metapackage is intended to reflect the core of the - GNOME desktop environment: the basic tools and subsystems that - together constitute GNOME. The gnome metapackage is intended to - reflect the broader desktop environment, including extra components - and applications. - -2. network-manager is the GNOME network control system, and is - recommended for most GNOME users. Some Debian GNOME users don't like - some of network-manager's behavior and prefer to instead use other - tools, either basic ifupdown or other frameworks such as wicd. - -3. In squeeze, the gnome metapackage lists network-manager in Recommends - but not Depends. In wheezy, currently, network-manager has moved from - gnome to gnome-core, and from Recommends to Depends. This represents - a substantially increased insistance that users of the GNOME - metapackages have network-manager installed; specifically, there is no - longer any way to install any but the most minimal GNOME metapackage - (gnome-session) without installing network-manager, and users who have - gnome or gnome-core installed but have removed or never installed - network-manager will have network-manager installed during an upgrade - from squeeze. - -4. For most applications and components, the only drawback of this would - be some additional disk space usage, since the application, despite - being installed, wouldn't need to be used. However, network-manager - assumes that, if it is installed, it should attempt to manage the - system's network configuration. It attempts to avoid overriding local - manual configuration, but it isn't able to detect all cases where the - user is using some other component or system to manage networking. - The user has to take separate, explicit (and somewhat unusual for the - average user) action to disable network-manager after it has been - installed. - -5. The Technical Committee believes that this will cause undesireable - behavior for upgrades from squeeze, and (of somewhat lesser - importance) will make it more difficult than necessary for GNOME users - to swap network management components, something for which there - appears to be noticable demand. We therefore believe that - network-manager should be moved to Recommends in gnome-core. - -6. Please note that this is not a general statement about GNOME - components. It is very specific to network-manager because all of the - following apply: - - (i) The package takes action automatically because it is installed, - rather than being a component that can either be run or not at the - user's choice. - - (ii) The package has historically been recommended rather than listed - as a dependency, so existing Debian users are used to that - behavior and will expect it to be preserved during upgrades. - - (ii) There is both demonstrable, intentional widespread replacement of - that package by Debian GNOME users and no significant loss of - unrelated GNOME desktop functionality by replacing it with a - different component. - - If any of these points did not apply, the situation would be - significantly different. - -Therefore: - -7. The Technical Committee overrules the decision of the gnome-core - metapackage maintainers. The dependency from gnome-core to - network-manager-gnome should be downgraded to Recommends. - -8. The Technical Committee requests that the Release Managers unblock - the update to implement this decision, so that this change may be - released in wheezy. - -===== EMAIL EPILOGUE -===== # processor will insert "Please see http://..." for the TC bug. -===== # mentioning bug urls here will result in a "see also" on the web page - -http://bugs.debian.org/645656 (against gnome-core) will be used to -track the the implementation of this decision. - -Along with the specific case of gnome-core and network-manager, the TC -also considered the policy on use of Recommends more generally, -particularly in the context of metapackages; this was also discussed -and resulted in a TC decision which can be found at -http://bugs.debian.org/681783. diff --git a/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/ijackson-draft b/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/ijackson-draft deleted file mode 100644 index 6f1338f..0000000 --- a/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/ijackson-draft +++ /dev/null @@ -1,61 +0,0 @@ - Whereas: - - 1. Our technical objectives are: - - (i) Users who do not do anything special should get - network-manager along with gnome (in this case, along with - gnome-core). These users should continue to have - network-manager installed, across upgrades. - - (ii) Users should be able to conveniently install and upgrade - gnome without network-manager. - - (iii) Users who deliberately removed network-manager in squeeze - (which they will generally have done by deliberately violating - the Recommends from the gnome metapackage) should not have to - do anything special to avoid it coming back in wheezy. - - (iv) Users who do make a decision that they do not want to use - network-manager should not have to read specific - documentation, or temporarily have network-manager installed, - risk being exposed to bugs in network-manager's configuration - arrangements, and so on. - - 2. Our technical objectives do NOT include: - - (i) The `gnome-core' metapackage should in some sense perfectly or - exactly correspond to GNOME upstream's definition of `the GNOME - Core', specifically including every such component as a hard - Depends. - - (ii) The contents of any metapackage should be the correct - expression of the subjective opinion of the metapackage's - maintainer. - - (iii) Users who choose to globally disable Recommends should still - get the desired behaviours as described above in point 1. - - 3. The solution recommended by the gnome-core maintainers is - that users who do not wish to use network-manager should have it - installed but disable it. - - Installing network-manager in these circumstances does - not fully meet any of the above objectives apart from 1(i). - - 5. The alternative solution rejected by the gnome-core maintainers - is downgrade the dependency to Recommends. - - This solution meets all of the objectives from point 1, except - that infelicities in teh package manager may mean that the user - in 1(iii) may need to take action to prevent network-manager - being reinstalled during an upgrade. - - Therefore: - - 6. The Technical Committee overrules the decision of the gnome-core - metapackage maintainer. The dependency from gnome-core to - network-manager-gnome should be downgraded to Recommends. - - 7. The Technical Committee requests that the Release Managers - unblock the update to implement this decision, so that this - change may be released in wheezy. diff --git a/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft b/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft deleted file mode 100644 index 5ef6076..0000000 --- a/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft +++ /dev/null @@ -1,68 +0,0 @@ - The gnome-core metapackage is intended to reflect the core of the - GNOME desktop environment: the basic tools and subsystems that - together constitute GNOME. The gnome metapackage is intended to - reflect the broader desktop environment, including extra components - and applications. - - network-manager is the GNOME network control system, and is - recommended for most GNOME users. Some Debian GNOME users don't like - some of network-manager's behavior and prefer to instead use other - tools, either basic ifupdown or other frameworks such as wicd. - - In squeeze, the gnome metapackage lists network-manager in Recommends - but not Depends. In wheezy, currently, network-manager has moved from - gnome to gnome-core, and from Recommends to Depends. This represents - a substantially increased insistance that users of the GNOME - metapackages have network-manager installed. This change is, so far - as the Technical Committee understands, driven primarily by user - confusion and bug reports, but does not reflect a deeper or tighter - integration of network-manager into GNOME than was the case in - squeeze. - - If matters are left as they currently stand, users who have the gnome - metapackages installed but do not have network-manager installed will, - in the process of upgrading from squeeze to wheezy (either due to an - explicit decision to remove it or an implicit decision to not install - it by disabling automatic installation of Recommends), end up - installing network-manager on systems where it is currently not - installed. It will also no longer be possible for users to install - GNOME metapackages in wheezy without installing network-manager. - - For most applications and components, the only drawback of this would - be some additional disk space usage, since the application, despite - being installed, wouldn't need to be used. However, network-manager - assumes that, if it is installed, it should attempt to manage the - system's network configuration. It attempts to avoid overriding local - manual configuration, but it isn't able to detect all cases where the - user is using some other component or system to manage networking. - The user has to take separate, explicit (and somewhat unusual for the - average user) action to disable network-manager after it has been - installed. - - The Technical Committee believes that this will cause undesireable - behavior for upgrades from squeeze, and (of somewhat lesser - importance) will make it more difficult than necessary for GNOME users - to swap network management components, something for which there - appears to be noticable demand. We therefore believe that - network-manager should be either moved to Recommends in gnome-core, or - moved from the gnome-core metapackage to the gnome metapackage (which - is defined as including additional, optional components). - - Please note that this is not a general statement about GNOME - components. It is very specific to network-manager because all of the - following apply: - - 1. The package takes action automatically because it is installed, - rather than being a component that can either be run or not at the - user's choice. - - 2. The package has historically been recommended rather than listed as - a dependency, so existing Debian users are used to that behavior. - - 3. There is both demonstrable, intentional widespread replacement of - that package by Debian GNOME users and no significant loss of - unrelated GNOME desktop functionality by replacing it with a - different component. - - If any of these points did not apply, the situation would be - significantly different. diff --git a/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft-ijackson b/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft-ijackson deleted file mode 100644 index 36e77d3..0000000 --- a/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft-ijackson +++ /dev/null @@ -1,78 +0,0 @@ - Whereas: - - 1. The gnome-core metapackage is intended to reflect the core of the - GNOME desktop environment: the basic tools and subsystems that - together constitute GNOME. The gnome metapackage is intended to - reflect the broader desktop environment, including extra components - and applications. - - 2. network-manager is the GNOME network control system, and is - recommended for most GNOME users. Some Debian GNOME users don't like - some of network-manager's behavior and prefer to instead use other - tools, either basic ifupdown or other frameworks such as wicd. - - 3. In squeeze, the gnome metapackage lists network-manager in Recommends - but not Depends. In wheezy, currently, network-manager has moved from - gnome to gnome-core, and from Recommends to Depends. This represents - a substantially increased insistance that users of the GNOME - metapackages have network-manager installed. This change does - not reflect, so far as the Technical Committee understands, a - deeper or tighter integration of network-manager into GNOME than - was the case in squeeze. - - 4. If matters are left as they currently stand, users who have the - gnome metapackages installed but do not have network-manager - installed (either due to an explicit decision to remove it or an - implicit decision to not install it by disabling automatic - installation of Recommends) will, in the process of upgrading from - squeeze to wheezy, end up installing network-manager on systems - where it is currently not installed. It will also no longer be - possible for users to install GNOME metapackages in wheezy without - installing network-manager. - - 5. For most applications and components, the only drawback of this would - be some additional disk space usage, since the application, despite - being installed, wouldn't need to be used. However, network-manager - assumes that, if it is installed, it should attempt to manage the - system's network configuration. It attempts to avoid overriding local - manual configuration, but it isn't able to detect all cases where the - user is using some other component or system to manage networking. - The user has to take separate, explicit (and somewhat unusual for the - average user) action to disable network-manager after it has been - installed. - - 6. The Technical Committee believes that this will cause undesireable - behavior for upgrades from squeeze, and (of somewhat lesser - importance) will make it more difficult than necessary for GNOME users - to swap network management components, something for which there - appears to be noticable demand. We therefore believe that - network-manager should be moved to Recommends in gnome-core. - - 7. Please note that this is not a general statement about GNOME - components. It is very specific to network-manager because all of the - following apply: - - (i) The package takes action automatically because it is installed, - rather than being a component that can either be run or not at the - user's choice. - - (ii) The package has historically been recommended rather than listed as - a dependency, so existing Debian users are used to that behavior. - - (ii) There is both demonstrable, intentional widespread replacement of - that package by Debian GNOME users and no significant loss of - unrelated GNOME desktop functionality by replacing it with a - different component. - - 8. If any of these points did not apply, the situation would be - significantly different. - - Therefore: - - 9. The Technical Committee overrules the decision of the gnome-core - metapackage maintainers. The dependency from gnome-core to - network-manager-gnome should be downgraded to Recommends. - - 10. The Technical Committee requests that the Release Managers - unblock the update to implement this decision, so that this - change may be released in wheezy. diff --git a/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft-v2 b/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft-v2 deleted file mode 100644 index c757a54..0000000 --- a/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft-v2 +++ /dev/null @@ -1,71 +0,0 @@ - Whereas: - - 1. The gnome-core metapackage is intended to reflect the core of the - GNOME desktop environment: the basic tools and subsystems that - together constitute GNOME. The gnome metapackage is intended to - reflect the broader desktop environment, including extra components - and applications. - - 2. network-manager is the GNOME network control system, and is - recommended for most GNOME users. Some Debian GNOME users don't like - some of network-manager's behavior and prefer to instead use other - tools, either basic ifupdown or other frameworks such as wicd. - - 3. In squeeze, the gnome metapackage lists network-manager in Recommends - but not Depends. In wheezy, currently, network-manager has moved from - gnome to gnome-core, and from Recommends to Depends. This represents - a substantially increased insistance that users of the GNOME - metapackages have network-manager installed; specifically, there is no - longer any way to install any but the most minimal GNOME metapackage - (gnome-session) without installing network-manager, and users who have - gnome or gnome-core installed but have removed or never installed - network-manager will have network-manager installed during an upgrade - from squeeze. - - 4. For most applications and components, the only drawback of this would - be some additional disk space usage, since the application, despite - being installed, wouldn't need to be used. However, network-manager - assumes that, if it is installed, it should attempt to manage the - system's network configuration. It attempts to avoid overriding local - manual configuration, but it isn't able to detect all cases where the - user is using some other component or system to manage networking. - The user has to take separate, explicit (and somewhat unusual for the - average user) action to disable network-manager after it has been - installed. - - 5. The Technical Committee believes that this will cause undesireable - behavior for upgrades from squeeze, and (of somewhat lesser - importance) will make it more difficult than necessary for GNOME users - to swap network management components, something for which there - appears to be noticable demand. We therefore believe that - network-manager should be moved to Recommends in gnome-core. - - 6. Please note that this is not a general statement about GNOME - components. It is very specific to network-manager because all of the - following apply: - - (i) The package takes action automatically because it is installed, - rather than being a component that can either be run or not at the - user's choice. - - (ii) The package has historically been recommended rather than listed - as a dependency, so existing Debian users are used to that - behavior and will expect it to be preserved during upgrades. - - (ii) There is both demonstrable, intentional widespread replacement of - that package by Debian GNOME users and no significant loss of - unrelated GNOME desktop functionality by replacing it with a - different component. - - If any of these points did not apply, the situation would be - significantly different. - - Therefore: - - 7. The Technical Committee overrules the decision of the gnome-core - metapackage maintainers. The dependency from gnome-core to - network-manager-gnome should be downgraded to Recommends. - - 8. The Technical Committee requests that the Release Managers unblock - the update to implement this decision, so that this change may be - released in wheezy. diff --git a/685795_new_member/call_for_nominations.txt b/685795_new_member/call_for_nominations.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 4e09a1b..0000000 --- a/685795_new_member/call_for_nominations.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,24 +0,0 @@ -To: debian-devel-announce@lists.debian.org -Subject: Call for nominations for technical committee seat - -First and foremost, the technical committee would like to thank Manoj -Srivastava for serving on the committee in addition to his many other -services to Debian. With his resignation from the technical -committee,[1] there is currently one empty seat which can be filled. - -To fill this seat, we are soliciting nominations. To nominate yourself -or someone else, please send e-mail to debian-ctte-private@debian.org -with the subject "CTTE Nomination of loginname", where loginname is -the nominee's Debian account login.[2] Please let us know in the body -of the e-mail why the nominee would be a good fit for the committee, -specifically instances where the nominee was able to help resolve -disagreements, both technical and non-technical, which you were a -party to or observer of. - -We anticipate starting our selection process on or about the first of -October. After the selection, the committee will then recommend a -nominee to the project leader, who may appoint the nominee (§6.2). - - -1: http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/502808CD.3090508@golden-gryphon.com -2: See http://db.debian.org/ if you need to look the login up diff --git a/685795_new_member/thank_nominees.txt b/685795_new_member/thank_nominees.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 6a1b7b7..0000000 --- a/685795_new_member/thank_nominees.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,19 +0,0 @@ -From: Don Armstrong -To: debian-devel-announce@lists.debian.org -Subject: CTTE Nominations closed; thanks to all nominees for agreeing to serve -Reply-to: debian-ctte-private@debian.org -Mail-Followup-To: debian-ctte-private@debian.org - -The Technical Committee would like to thank all of the following -nominees for agreeing to serve Debian on the Technical Committee: - -<> - -The Technical Committee has begun private deliberations, and will -recommend a nominee to the Project Leader for approval under §6.2.2. - -Anyone who wishes to submit information about any of the nominees -(both praise and concerns) should e-mail -debian-ctte-private@debian.org, and the CTTE will take the information -into account. - diff --git a/688772_gnome_depends_nmg/decision b/688772_gnome_depends_nmg/decision deleted file mode 100644 index b9feacd..0000000 --- a/688772_gnome_depends_nmg/decision +++ /dev/null @@ -1,65 +0,0 @@ -===== TITLE - -Dependency of meta-gnome on network-manager - -===== WEB SUMMARY - -The committee overrules the dependency of meta-gnome on -network-manager while concerns raised in §4 of the decision in -#681834 remain unaddressed. - -===== EMAIL INTRO - -The technical committee was asked in #688772 to revisit the dependency -of gnome metapackages on network-manager. The decision is below: - -===== EMAIL EPILOGUE - -The committee would like to thank Michael Biebl for discussing the -concerns of the technical committee and working to address those -concerns through technical changes to NM. - -===== DECISION - -1. The TC notes the decision of the meta-gnome maintainers to - implement the TC decision in #681834 by: - (a) softening the dependency in the gnome-core metapackage - from Depends to Recommends, as required - (b) adding a new dependency in the gnome metapackage, - as a Depends. (In squeeze, this is where the dependency - was, but it was a Recommends.) - -2. Our intent, as stated in the rationale section of our previous - decision (#681834, paras 3 and 5), is that squeeze users who have - gnome installed but not network-manager do not find that - network-manager becomes installed when they upgrade to wheezy. - -3. A Recommends from gnome to network-manager-gnome would serve no - purpose in wheezy as gnome Depends on gnome-core which already - Recommends network-manager-gnome. - -Therefore - -4. We overrule the decision of the meta-gnome maintainers to add a - dependency from gnome to network-manager-gnome; this dependency - should be removed. If in the opinion of the NM maintainer (and - before the release of wheezy the Chair of the Technical Committee - or an individual delegated by the Chair in consultation with the - Release Team) the concerns raised in §4 of the CTTE decision - #681834 have been addressed through technical means (e.g. by - preventing the starting of NM as discussed in #688772), the - meta-gnome maintainers may freely adjust the dependencies as - usual. - - Specifically, valid bugs where existing valid network - configurations are broken by the automatic, required installation - on system upgrade of packages not previously installed which - perform network configuration on should have severity serious. - -5. We request that the Release Team unblock update(s) to meta-gnome so - that our decisions may be implemented in wheezy. - -6. We request that a release note is created explaining that gnome - users who do not currently have NM installed consider installing - it. diff --git a/688772_gnome_depends_nmg/don_draft.txt b/688772_gnome_depends_nmg/don_draft.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 429ce51..0000000 --- a/688772_gnome_depends_nmg/don_draft.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,67 +0,0 @@ -1. The TC notes the decision of the meta-gnome maintainers to - implement the TC decision in #681834 by: - (a) softening the dependency in the gnome-core metapackage - from Depends to Recommends, as required - (b) adding a new dependency in the gnome metapackage, - as a Depends. (In squeeze, this is where the dependency - was, but it was a Recommends.) - -2. Our intent, as stated in the rationale section of our previous - decision (#681834, paras 3 and 5), is that squeeze users who have - gnome installed but not network-manager do not find that - network-manager becomes installed when they upgrade to wheezy. - -3. A Recommends from gnome to network-manager-gnome would serve no - purpose in wheezy as gnome Depends on gnome-core which already - Recommends network-manager-gnome. - -Therefore - -A 4. We overrule the decision of the meta-gnome maintainers to add a -A dependency from gnome to network-manager-gnome; this dependency -A should be removed for the release of wheezy. -A -A 5. We request that the Release Team unblock update(s) to meta-gnome so -A that our decisions may be implemented in wheezy. -A -A 6. We request that a release note is created explaining that gnome -A users who do not currently have NM installed consider installing -A it. - - -B 4. We overrule the decision of the meta-gnome maintainers to add a -B dependency from gnome to network-manager-gnome; this dependency -B should be removed. If in the opinion of the NM maintainer (and -B before the release of wheezy the Chair of the Technical Committee -B or an individual delegated by the Chair in consultation with the -B Release Team) the concerns raised in §4 of the CTTE decision -B #681834 have been addressed through technical means (e.g. by -B preventing the starting of NM as discussed in #688772), the -B meta-gnome maintainers may freely adjust the dependencies as -B usual. -B -B Specifically, valid bugs where existing valid network -B configurations are broken by the automatic, required installation -B on system upgrade of packages not previously installed which -B perform network configuration on should have severity serious. -B -B 5. We request that the Release Team unblock update(s) to meta-gnome so -B that our decisions may be implemented in wheezy. -B -B 6. We request that a release note is created explaining that gnome -B users who do not currently have NM installed consider installing -B it. - -C 4. After further discussion, we understand that reintroducing -C network-manager on upgrade was part of the intent, due to both -C substantial improvements in network-manager and tighter integration of -C network-manager with the GNOME desktop in wheezy. Since the gnome -C metapackage has historically been more aggressive at pulling in -C additional packages, we believe the move of the dependency from -C gnome-core to gnome is an acceptable compromise that was not raised -C during the previous discussion. Users who want to remove -C network-manager can still use the gnome-core metapackage to get the -C basic GNOME desktop functionality. -C -C We recommend that this upgrade behavior for users of the gnome -C metapackage be documented in the release notes. diff --git a/688772_gnome_depends_nmg/ian_draft.txt b/688772_gnome_depends_nmg/ian_draft.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 4f2c8d5..0000000 --- a/688772_gnome_depends_nmg/ian_draft.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,61 +0,0 @@ -Whereas - -1. The TC notes the decision of the meta-gnome maintainers to - implement our decision in #681834 by: - (a) softening the dependency in the gnome-core metapackage - from Depends to Recommends, as required - (b) adding a new dependency in the gnome metapackage, - as a Depends. (In squeeze, this is where the dependency - was, but it was a Recommends.) - -2. Our intent, as stated in the rationale section of our previous - decision (#681834, paras 3 and 5), is that squeeze users who have - gnome installed but not network-manager do not find that - network-manager becomes installed when they upgrade to wheezy. - -3. The actions of the meta-gnome maintainers do not achieve this - objective. - -4. Insofar as any reasons have been advanced for the meta-gnome - maintainer's decision, we do not find them convincing. - -5. A Recommends from gnome to network-manager-gnome would serve no - purpose in wheezy as gnome Depends on gnome-core which already - Recommends network-manager-gnome. - -Therefore - -6. We overrule the decision of the meta-gnome maintainers to add a - dependency from gnome to network-manager-gnome. This dependency - should be removed. - -7. We request that the Release Team unblock update(s) to meta-gnome so - that our decisions may be implemented in wheezy. - -8. We specifically forbid anyone from introducing in wheezy, or - in sid until wheezy is released: - a. Any new or enhanced dependencies, or any other mechanisms, - which increase the likelihood of network-manager being - installed; - b. Any new or enhanced user-facing warnings, imprecations, or - other kinds of message regarding the alleged desirability or - requirement to install network-manager; - c. Any change which in any way impairs (or further impairs) the - functioning of systems with GNOME components installed but - without network-manager; - d. Any change which is contrary to the spirit or intent of either - our previous resolution in #681834 or this resolution. - without first obtaining the permission of at least one member of - the Technical Committee. - -Furthermore - -9. It is disappointing that this proposed solution to the problem was - not mentioned during the TC discussion. If it had been, it could - have been accepted or rejected by the TC at the time. - -10. We remind everyone that the Constitution requires members of the - project not to work against decisions properly made according to - the project's governance processes. On this occasion we do not - feel it necessary to refer anyone to the Debian Account Managers - asking for a review of their status. diff --git a/698556_isdnutils_create_devices/decision b/698556_isdnutils_create_devices/decision deleted file mode 100644 index fd88c21..0000000 --- a/698556_isdnutils_create_devices/decision +++ /dev/null @@ -1,48 +0,0 @@ -===== TITLE - -Creation of isdn devices by isdnutils - -===== WEB SUMMARY - -The committee overrules the maintainer of isdnutils to require the -inclusion of code to create isdn devices by isdnutils. - -===== EMAIL INTRO - -The technical committee was asked in #698556 to overrule the decision -of the isdnutils maintainer to remove the creation of devices. - -===== EMAIL EPILOGUE - - -===== DECISION - -Whereas - -1. The technical committee was asked to overrule the decision of the -isdnutils maintainer to remove the creation of devices (see #698556). - -2. There is a tested patch ready to use available. - -3. The bug in question is considered release critical by the release -team. - -4. In spite of being asked, the maintainer didn't comment on this -request. - -5. Considering the current time plan, we don't expect to have other -ways to create devices nodes (i.e. via kernel changes and udev) in -time for the next stable release. - - -The Technical Committee - -1. Decides to overrule the decision of the maintainer of isdnutils to -remove the creation of device nodes - -2. Authorizes Christoph Biedl to undo the change with an upload to -unstable earliest an week after the decision, unless the maintainer -uploads an revert faster. - -3. Asks the release team to allow the fixed package to move to -testing for the next stable release. diff --git a/resolved_issues/681783_recommends_in_metapackages/681783_recommends_in_metapackages.org b/resolved_issues/681783_recommends_in_metapackages/681783_recommends_in_metapackages.org new file mode 100644 index 0000000..954ba62 --- /dev/null +++ b/resolved_issues/681783_recommends_in_metapackages/681783_recommends_in_metapackages.org @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@ +* Issue http://bugs.debian.org/681783 http://bugs.debian.org/681834 +** gnome-core Depends: on network-manager which prevents network-manager from being easily replaced with wicd or similar +** Are Depends: appropriate for metapackages +** Is running with recommends off supported +* Possible Solutions +** Punt to policy +** Ian to write up statement about Recommends +* Open Questions +** Appears to be general instead of specific to network-manager and the gnome metapackage +* Proposed Resolutions +** http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/20514.35772.350203.926582@chiark.greenend.org.uk +** http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/87k3x9royz.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu +* Adopted Resolution +* Involved Parties +** gnome-core@packages.debian.org, 681834@bugs.debian.org, 681783@bugs.debian.org diff --git a/resolved_issues/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/decision b/resolved_issues/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/decision new file mode 100644 index 0000000..b8fc3c5 --- /dev/null +++ b/resolved_issues/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/decision @@ -0,0 +1,104 @@ +wip wip wip do not use + +===== TITLE + +Dependency from gnome-core to network-manager + +===== WEB SUMMARY + +gnome-core should Recommend, not Depend, on network-manager +(overrule maintainer). + +===== EMAIL INTRO + +The dependency from gnome-core to network-manager (via +network-manager-gnome) was referred to the Technical Committee. + +The TC has made the following decision: + +===== DECISION + +Whereas: + +1. The gnome-core metapackage is intended to reflect the core of the + GNOME desktop environment: the basic tools and subsystems that + together constitute GNOME. The gnome metapackage is intended to + reflect the broader desktop environment, including extra components + and applications. + +2. network-manager is the GNOME network control system, and is + recommended for most GNOME users. Some Debian GNOME users don't like + some of network-manager's behavior and prefer to instead use other + tools, either basic ifupdown or other frameworks such as wicd. + +3. In squeeze, the gnome metapackage lists network-manager in Recommends + but not Depends. In wheezy, currently, network-manager has moved from + gnome to gnome-core, and from Recommends to Depends. This represents + a substantially increased insistance that users of the GNOME + metapackages have network-manager installed; specifically, there is no + longer any way to install any but the most minimal GNOME metapackage + (gnome-session) without installing network-manager, and users who have + gnome or gnome-core installed but have removed or never installed + network-manager will have network-manager installed during an upgrade + from squeeze. + +4. For most applications and components, the only drawback of this would + be some additional disk space usage, since the application, despite + being installed, wouldn't need to be used. However, network-manager + assumes that, if it is installed, it should attempt to manage the + system's network configuration. It attempts to avoid overriding local + manual configuration, but it isn't able to detect all cases where the + user is using some other component or system to manage networking. + The user has to take separate, explicit (and somewhat unusual for the + average user) action to disable network-manager after it has been + installed. + +5. The Technical Committee believes that this will cause undesireable + behavior for upgrades from squeeze, and (of somewhat lesser + importance) will make it more difficult than necessary for GNOME users + to swap network management components, something for which there + appears to be noticable demand. We therefore believe that + network-manager should be moved to Recommends in gnome-core. + +6. Please note that this is not a general statement about GNOME + components. It is very specific to network-manager because all of the + following apply: + + (i) The package takes action automatically because it is installed, + rather than being a component that can either be run or not at the + user's choice. + + (ii) The package has historically been recommended rather than listed + as a dependency, so existing Debian users are used to that + behavior and will expect it to be preserved during upgrades. + + (ii) There is both demonstrable, intentional widespread replacement of + that package by Debian GNOME users and no significant loss of + unrelated GNOME desktop functionality by replacing it with a + different component. + + If any of these points did not apply, the situation would be + significantly different. + +Therefore: + +7. The Technical Committee overrules the decision of the gnome-core + metapackage maintainers. The dependency from gnome-core to + network-manager-gnome should be downgraded to Recommends. + +8. The Technical Committee requests that the Release Managers unblock + the update to implement this decision, so that this change may be + released in wheezy. + +===== EMAIL EPILOGUE +===== # processor will insert "Please see http://..." for the TC bug. +===== # mentioning bug urls here will result in a "see also" on the web page + +http://bugs.debian.org/645656 (against gnome-core) will be used to +track the the implementation of this decision. + +Along with the specific case of gnome-core and network-manager, the TC +also considered the policy on use of Recommends more generally, +particularly in the context of metapackages; this was also discussed +and resulted in a TC decision which can be found at +http://bugs.debian.org/681783. diff --git a/resolved_issues/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/ijackson-draft b/resolved_issues/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/ijackson-draft new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6f1338f --- /dev/null +++ b/resolved_issues/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/ijackson-draft @@ -0,0 +1,61 @@ + Whereas: + + 1. Our technical objectives are: + + (i) Users who do not do anything special should get + network-manager along with gnome (in this case, along with + gnome-core). These users should continue to have + network-manager installed, across upgrades. + + (ii) Users should be able to conveniently install and upgrade + gnome without network-manager. + + (iii) Users who deliberately removed network-manager in squeeze + (which they will generally have done by deliberately violating + the Recommends from the gnome metapackage) should not have to + do anything special to avoid it coming back in wheezy. + + (iv) Users who do make a decision that they do not want to use + network-manager should not have to read specific + documentation, or temporarily have network-manager installed, + risk being exposed to bugs in network-manager's configuration + arrangements, and so on. + + 2. Our technical objectives do NOT include: + + (i) The `gnome-core' metapackage should in some sense perfectly or + exactly correspond to GNOME upstream's definition of `the GNOME + Core', specifically including every such component as a hard + Depends. + + (ii) The contents of any metapackage should be the correct + expression of the subjective opinion of the metapackage's + maintainer. + + (iii) Users who choose to globally disable Recommends should still + get the desired behaviours as described above in point 1. + + 3. The solution recommended by the gnome-core maintainers is + that users who do not wish to use network-manager should have it + installed but disable it. + + Installing network-manager in these circumstances does + not fully meet any of the above objectives apart from 1(i). + + 5. The alternative solution rejected by the gnome-core maintainers + is downgrade the dependency to Recommends. + + This solution meets all of the objectives from point 1, except + that infelicities in teh package manager may mean that the user + in 1(iii) may need to take action to prevent network-manager + being reinstalled during an upgrade. + + Therefore: + + 6. The Technical Committee overrules the decision of the gnome-core + metapackage maintainer. The dependency from gnome-core to + network-manager-gnome should be downgraded to Recommends. + + 7. The Technical Committee requests that the Release Managers + unblock the update to implement this decision, so that this + change may be released in wheezy. diff --git a/resolved_issues/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft b/resolved_issues/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft new file mode 100644 index 0000000..5ef6076 --- /dev/null +++ b/resolved_issues/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft @@ -0,0 +1,68 @@ + The gnome-core metapackage is intended to reflect the core of the + GNOME desktop environment: the basic tools and subsystems that + together constitute GNOME. The gnome metapackage is intended to + reflect the broader desktop environment, including extra components + and applications. + + network-manager is the GNOME network control system, and is + recommended for most GNOME users. Some Debian GNOME users don't like + some of network-manager's behavior and prefer to instead use other + tools, either basic ifupdown or other frameworks such as wicd. + + In squeeze, the gnome metapackage lists network-manager in Recommends + but not Depends. In wheezy, currently, network-manager has moved from + gnome to gnome-core, and from Recommends to Depends. This represents + a substantially increased insistance that users of the GNOME + metapackages have network-manager installed. This change is, so far + as the Technical Committee understands, driven primarily by user + confusion and bug reports, but does not reflect a deeper or tighter + integration of network-manager into GNOME than was the case in + squeeze. + + If matters are left as they currently stand, users who have the gnome + metapackages installed but do not have network-manager installed will, + in the process of upgrading from squeeze to wheezy (either due to an + explicit decision to remove it or an implicit decision to not install + it by disabling automatic installation of Recommends), end up + installing network-manager on systems where it is currently not + installed. It will also no longer be possible for users to install + GNOME metapackages in wheezy without installing network-manager. + + For most applications and components, the only drawback of this would + be some additional disk space usage, since the application, despite + being installed, wouldn't need to be used. However, network-manager + assumes that, if it is installed, it should attempt to manage the + system's network configuration. It attempts to avoid overriding local + manual configuration, but it isn't able to detect all cases where the + user is using some other component or system to manage networking. + The user has to take separate, explicit (and somewhat unusual for the + average user) action to disable network-manager after it has been + installed. + + The Technical Committee believes that this will cause undesireable + behavior for upgrades from squeeze, and (of somewhat lesser + importance) will make it more difficult than necessary for GNOME users + to swap network management components, something for which there + appears to be noticable demand. We therefore believe that + network-manager should be either moved to Recommends in gnome-core, or + moved from the gnome-core metapackage to the gnome metapackage (which + is defined as including additional, optional components). + + Please note that this is not a general statement about GNOME + components. It is very specific to network-manager because all of the + following apply: + + 1. The package takes action automatically because it is installed, + rather than being a component that can either be run or not at the + user's choice. + + 2. The package has historically been recommended rather than listed as + a dependency, so existing Debian users are used to that behavior. + + 3. There is both demonstrable, intentional widespread replacement of + that package by Debian GNOME users and no significant loss of + unrelated GNOME desktop functionality by replacing it with a + different component. + + If any of these points did not apply, the situation would be + significantly different. diff --git a/resolved_issues/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft-ijackson b/resolved_issues/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft-ijackson new file mode 100644 index 0000000..36e77d3 --- /dev/null +++ b/resolved_issues/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft-ijackson @@ -0,0 +1,78 @@ + Whereas: + + 1. The gnome-core metapackage is intended to reflect the core of the + GNOME desktop environment: the basic tools and subsystems that + together constitute GNOME. The gnome metapackage is intended to + reflect the broader desktop environment, including extra components + and applications. + + 2. network-manager is the GNOME network control system, and is + recommended for most GNOME users. Some Debian GNOME users don't like + some of network-manager's behavior and prefer to instead use other + tools, either basic ifupdown or other frameworks such as wicd. + + 3. In squeeze, the gnome metapackage lists network-manager in Recommends + but not Depends. In wheezy, currently, network-manager has moved from + gnome to gnome-core, and from Recommends to Depends. This represents + a substantially increased insistance that users of the GNOME + metapackages have network-manager installed. This change does + not reflect, so far as the Technical Committee understands, a + deeper or tighter integration of network-manager into GNOME than + was the case in squeeze. + + 4. If matters are left as they currently stand, users who have the + gnome metapackages installed but do not have network-manager + installed (either due to an explicit decision to remove it or an + implicit decision to not install it by disabling automatic + installation of Recommends) will, in the process of upgrading from + squeeze to wheezy, end up installing network-manager on systems + where it is currently not installed. It will also no longer be + possible for users to install GNOME metapackages in wheezy without + installing network-manager. + + 5. For most applications and components, the only drawback of this would + be some additional disk space usage, since the application, despite + being installed, wouldn't need to be used. However, network-manager + assumes that, if it is installed, it should attempt to manage the + system's network configuration. It attempts to avoid overriding local + manual configuration, but it isn't able to detect all cases where the + user is using some other component or system to manage networking. + The user has to take separate, explicit (and somewhat unusual for the + average user) action to disable network-manager after it has been + installed. + + 6. The Technical Committee believes that this will cause undesireable + behavior for upgrades from squeeze, and (of somewhat lesser + importance) will make it more difficult than necessary for GNOME users + to swap network management components, something for which there + appears to be noticable demand. We therefore believe that + network-manager should be moved to Recommends in gnome-core. + + 7. Please note that this is not a general statement about GNOME + components. It is very specific to network-manager because all of the + following apply: + + (i) The package takes action automatically because it is installed, + rather than being a component that can either be run or not at the + user's choice. + + (ii) The package has historically been recommended rather than listed as + a dependency, so existing Debian users are used to that behavior. + + (ii) There is both demonstrable, intentional widespread replacement of + that package by Debian GNOME users and no significant loss of + unrelated GNOME desktop functionality by replacing it with a + different component. + + 8. If any of these points did not apply, the situation would be + significantly different. + + Therefore: + + 9. The Technical Committee overrules the decision of the gnome-core + metapackage maintainers. The dependency from gnome-core to + network-manager-gnome should be downgraded to Recommends. + + 10. The Technical Committee requests that the Release Managers + unblock the update to implement this decision, so that this + change may be released in wheezy. diff --git a/resolved_issues/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft-v2 b/resolved_issues/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft-v2 new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c757a54 --- /dev/null +++ b/resolved_issues/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft-v2 @@ -0,0 +1,71 @@ + Whereas: + + 1. The gnome-core metapackage is intended to reflect the core of the + GNOME desktop environment: the basic tools and subsystems that + together constitute GNOME. The gnome metapackage is intended to + reflect the broader desktop environment, including extra components + and applications. + + 2. network-manager is the GNOME network control system, and is + recommended for most GNOME users. Some Debian GNOME users don't like + some of network-manager's behavior and prefer to instead use other + tools, either basic ifupdown or other frameworks such as wicd. + + 3. In squeeze, the gnome metapackage lists network-manager in Recommends + but not Depends. In wheezy, currently, network-manager has moved from + gnome to gnome-core, and from Recommends to Depends. This represents + a substantially increased insistance that users of the GNOME + metapackages have network-manager installed; specifically, there is no + longer any way to install any but the most minimal GNOME metapackage + (gnome-session) without installing network-manager, and users who have + gnome or gnome-core installed but have removed or never installed + network-manager will have network-manager installed during an upgrade + from squeeze. + + 4. For most applications and components, the only drawback of this would + be some additional disk space usage, since the application, despite + being installed, wouldn't need to be used. However, network-manager + assumes that, if it is installed, it should attempt to manage the + system's network configuration. It attempts to avoid overriding local + manual configuration, but it isn't able to detect all cases where the + user is using some other component or system to manage networking. + The user has to take separate, explicit (and somewhat unusual for the + average user) action to disable network-manager after it has been + installed. + + 5. The Technical Committee believes that this will cause undesireable + behavior for upgrades from squeeze, and (of somewhat lesser + importance) will make it more difficult than necessary for GNOME users + to swap network management components, something for which there + appears to be noticable demand. We therefore believe that + network-manager should be moved to Recommends in gnome-core. + + 6. Please note that this is not a general statement about GNOME + components. It is very specific to network-manager because all of the + following apply: + + (i) The package takes action automatically because it is installed, + rather than being a component that can either be run or not at the + user's choice. + + (ii) The package has historically been recommended rather than listed + as a dependency, so existing Debian users are used to that + behavior and will expect it to be preserved during upgrades. + + (ii) There is both demonstrable, intentional widespread replacement of + that package by Debian GNOME users and no significant loss of + unrelated GNOME desktop functionality by replacing it with a + different component. + + If any of these points did not apply, the situation would be + significantly different. + + Therefore: + + 7. The Technical Committee overrules the decision of the gnome-core + metapackage maintainers. The dependency from gnome-core to + network-manager-gnome should be downgraded to Recommends. + + 8. The Technical Committee requests that the Release Managers unblock + the update to implement this decision, so that this change may be + released in wheezy. diff --git a/resolved_issues/685795_new_member/call_for_nominations.txt b/resolved_issues/685795_new_member/call_for_nominations.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..4e09a1b --- /dev/null +++ b/resolved_issues/685795_new_member/call_for_nominations.txt @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@ +To: debian-devel-announce@lists.debian.org +Subject: Call for nominations for technical committee seat + +First and foremost, the technical committee would like to thank Manoj +Srivastava for serving on the committee in addition to his many other +services to Debian. With his resignation from the technical +committee,[1] there is currently one empty seat which can be filled. + +To fill this seat, we are soliciting nominations. To nominate yourself +or someone else, please send e-mail to debian-ctte-private@debian.org +with the subject "CTTE Nomination of loginname", where loginname is +the nominee's Debian account login.[2] Please let us know in the body +of the e-mail why the nominee would be a good fit for the committee, +specifically instances where the nominee was able to help resolve +disagreements, both technical and non-technical, which you were a +party to or observer of. + +We anticipate starting our selection process on or about the first of +October. After the selection, the committee will then recommend a +nominee to the project leader, who may appoint the nominee (§6.2). + + +1: http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/502808CD.3090508@golden-gryphon.com +2: See http://db.debian.org/ if you need to look the login up diff --git a/resolved_issues/685795_new_member/thank_nominees.txt b/resolved_issues/685795_new_member/thank_nominees.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6a1b7b7 --- /dev/null +++ b/resolved_issues/685795_new_member/thank_nominees.txt @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ +From: Don Armstrong +To: debian-devel-announce@lists.debian.org +Subject: CTTE Nominations closed; thanks to all nominees for agreeing to serve +Reply-to: debian-ctte-private@debian.org +Mail-Followup-To: debian-ctte-private@debian.org + +The Technical Committee would like to thank all of the following +nominees for agreeing to serve Debian on the Technical Committee: + +<> + +The Technical Committee has begun private deliberations, and will +recommend a nominee to the Project Leader for approval under §6.2.2. + +Anyone who wishes to submit information about any of the nominees +(both praise and concerns) should e-mail +debian-ctte-private@debian.org, and the CTTE will take the information +into account. + diff --git a/resolved_issues/688772_gnome_depends_nmg/decision b/resolved_issues/688772_gnome_depends_nmg/decision new file mode 100644 index 0000000..b9feacd --- /dev/null +++ b/resolved_issues/688772_gnome_depends_nmg/decision @@ -0,0 +1,65 @@ +===== TITLE + +Dependency of meta-gnome on network-manager + +===== WEB SUMMARY + +The committee overrules the dependency of meta-gnome on +network-manager while concerns raised in §4 of the decision in +#681834 remain unaddressed. + +===== EMAIL INTRO + +The technical committee was asked in #688772 to revisit the dependency +of gnome metapackages on network-manager. The decision is below: + +===== EMAIL EPILOGUE + +The committee would like to thank Michael Biebl for discussing the +concerns of the technical committee and working to address those +concerns through technical changes to NM. + +===== DECISION + +1. The TC notes the decision of the meta-gnome maintainers to + implement the TC decision in #681834 by: + (a) softening the dependency in the gnome-core metapackage + from Depends to Recommends, as required + (b) adding a new dependency in the gnome metapackage, + as a Depends. (In squeeze, this is where the dependency + was, but it was a Recommends.) + +2. Our intent, as stated in the rationale section of our previous + decision (#681834, paras 3 and 5), is that squeeze users who have + gnome installed but not network-manager do not find that + network-manager becomes installed when they upgrade to wheezy. + +3. A Recommends from gnome to network-manager-gnome would serve no + purpose in wheezy as gnome Depends on gnome-core which already + Recommends network-manager-gnome. + +Therefore + +4. We overrule the decision of the meta-gnome maintainers to add a + dependency from gnome to network-manager-gnome; this dependency + should be removed. If in the opinion of the NM maintainer (and + before the release of wheezy the Chair of the Technical Committee + or an individual delegated by the Chair in consultation with the + Release Team) the concerns raised in §4 of the CTTE decision + #681834 have been addressed through technical means (e.g. by + preventing the starting of NM as discussed in #688772), the + meta-gnome maintainers may freely adjust the dependencies as + usual. + + Specifically, valid bugs where existing valid network + configurations are broken by the automatic, required installation + on system upgrade of packages not previously installed which + perform network configuration on should have severity serious. + +5. We request that the Release Team unblock update(s) to meta-gnome so + that our decisions may be implemented in wheezy. + +6. We request that a release note is created explaining that gnome + users who do not currently have NM installed consider installing + it. diff --git a/resolved_issues/688772_gnome_depends_nmg/don_draft.txt b/resolved_issues/688772_gnome_depends_nmg/don_draft.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..429ce51 --- /dev/null +++ b/resolved_issues/688772_gnome_depends_nmg/don_draft.txt @@ -0,0 +1,67 @@ +1. The TC notes the decision of the meta-gnome maintainers to + implement the TC decision in #681834 by: + (a) softening the dependency in the gnome-core metapackage + from Depends to Recommends, as required + (b) adding a new dependency in the gnome metapackage, + as a Depends. (In squeeze, this is where the dependency + was, but it was a Recommends.) + +2. Our intent, as stated in the rationale section of our previous + decision (#681834, paras 3 and 5), is that squeeze users who have + gnome installed but not network-manager do not find that + network-manager becomes installed when they upgrade to wheezy. + +3. A Recommends from gnome to network-manager-gnome would serve no + purpose in wheezy as gnome Depends on gnome-core which already + Recommends network-manager-gnome. + +Therefore + +A 4. We overrule the decision of the meta-gnome maintainers to add a +A dependency from gnome to network-manager-gnome; this dependency +A should be removed for the release of wheezy. +A +A 5. We request that the Release Team unblock update(s) to meta-gnome so +A that our decisions may be implemented in wheezy. +A +A 6. We request that a release note is created explaining that gnome +A users who do not currently have NM installed consider installing +A it. + + +B 4. We overrule the decision of the meta-gnome maintainers to add a +B dependency from gnome to network-manager-gnome; this dependency +B should be removed. If in the opinion of the NM maintainer (and +B before the release of wheezy the Chair of the Technical Committee +B or an individual delegated by the Chair in consultation with the +B Release Team) the concerns raised in §4 of the CTTE decision +B #681834 have been addressed through technical means (e.g. by +B preventing the starting of NM as discussed in #688772), the +B meta-gnome maintainers may freely adjust the dependencies as +B usual. +B +B Specifically, valid bugs where existing valid network +B configurations are broken by the automatic, required installation +B on system upgrade of packages not previously installed which +B perform network configuration on should have severity serious. +B +B 5. We request that the Release Team unblock update(s) to meta-gnome so +B that our decisions may be implemented in wheezy. +B +B 6. We request that a release note is created explaining that gnome +B users who do not currently have NM installed consider installing +B it. + +C 4. After further discussion, we understand that reintroducing +C network-manager on upgrade was part of the intent, due to both +C substantial improvements in network-manager and tighter integration of +C network-manager with the GNOME desktop in wheezy. Since the gnome +C metapackage has historically been more aggressive at pulling in +C additional packages, we believe the move of the dependency from +C gnome-core to gnome is an acceptable compromise that was not raised +C during the previous discussion. Users who want to remove +C network-manager can still use the gnome-core metapackage to get the +C basic GNOME desktop functionality. +C +C We recommend that this upgrade behavior for users of the gnome +C metapackage be documented in the release notes. diff --git a/resolved_issues/688772_gnome_depends_nmg/ian_draft.txt b/resolved_issues/688772_gnome_depends_nmg/ian_draft.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..4f2c8d5 --- /dev/null +++ b/resolved_issues/688772_gnome_depends_nmg/ian_draft.txt @@ -0,0 +1,61 @@ +Whereas + +1. The TC notes the decision of the meta-gnome maintainers to + implement our decision in #681834 by: + (a) softening the dependency in the gnome-core metapackage + from Depends to Recommends, as required + (b) adding a new dependency in the gnome metapackage, + as a Depends. (In squeeze, this is where the dependency + was, but it was a Recommends.) + +2. Our intent, as stated in the rationale section of our previous + decision (#681834, paras 3 and 5), is that squeeze users who have + gnome installed but not network-manager do not find that + network-manager becomes installed when they upgrade to wheezy. + +3. The actions of the meta-gnome maintainers do not achieve this + objective. + +4. Insofar as any reasons have been advanced for the meta-gnome + maintainer's decision, we do not find them convincing. + +5. A Recommends from gnome to network-manager-gnome would serve no + purpose in wheezy as gnome Depends on gnome-core which already + Recommends network-manager-gnome. + +Therefore + +6. We overrule the decision of the meta-gnome maintainers to add a + dependency from gnome to network-manager-gnome. This dependency + should be removed. + +7. We request that the Release Team unblock update(s) to meta-gnome so + that our decisions may be implemented in wheezy. + +8. We specifically forbid anyone from introducing in wheezy, or + in sid until wheezy is released: + a. Any new or enhanced dependencies, or any other mechanisms, + which increase the likelihood of network-manager being + installed; + b. Any new or enhanced user-facing warnings, imprecations, or + other kinds of message regarding the alleged desirability or + requirement to install network-manager; + c. Any change which in any way impairs (or further impairs) the + functioning of systems with GNOME components installed but + without network-manager; + d. Any change which is contrary to the spirit or intent of either + our previous resolution in #681834 or this resolution. + without first obtaining the permission of at least one member of + the Technical Committee. + +Furthermore + +9. It is disappointing that this proposed solution to the problem was + not mentioned during the TC discussion. If it had been, it could + have been accepted or rejected by the TC at the time. + +10. We remind everyone that the Constitution requires members of the + project not to work against decisions properly made according to + the project's governance processes. On this occasion we do not + feel it necessary to refer anyone to the Debian Account Managers + asking for a review of their status. diff --git a/resolved_issues/698556_isdnutils_create_devices/decision b/resolved_issues/698556_isdnutils_create_devices/decision new file mode 100644 index 0000000..fd88c21 --- /dev/null +++ b/resolved_issues/698556_isdnutils_create_devices/decision @@ -0,0 +1,48 @@ +===== TITLE + +Creation of isdn devices by isdnutils + +===== WEB SUMMARY + +The committee overrules the maintainer of isdnutils to require the +inclusion of code to create isdn devices by isdnutils. + +===== EMAIL INTRO + +The technical committee was asked in #698556 to overrule the decision +of the isdnutils maintainer to remove the creation of devices. + +===== EMAIL EPILOGUE + + +===== DECISION + +Whereas + +1. The technical committee was asked to overrule the decision of the +isdnutils maintainer to remove the creation of devices (see #698556). + +2. There is a tested patch ready to use available. + +3. The bug in question is considered release critical by the release +team. + +4. In spite of being asked, the maintainer didn't comment on this +request. + +5. Considering the current time plan, we don't expect to have other +ways to create devices nodes (i.e. via kernel changes and udev) in +time for the next stable release. + + +The Technical Committee + +1. Decides to overrule the decision of the maintainer of isdnutils to +remove the creation of device nodes + +2. Authorizes Christoph Biedl to undo the change with an upload to +unstable earliest an week after the decision, unless the maintainer +uploads an revert faster. + +3. Asks the release team to allow the fixed package to move to +testing for the next stable release.