From: Didier Raboud Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 08:26:22 +0000 (+0100) Subject: Move 841294 to resolved_issues X-Git-Url: https://git.donarmstrong.com/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=b2dddcc0a65581a094dc99851efa9799b14bce55;p=debian-ctte.git Move 841294 to resolved_issues --- diff --git a/841294_global/draft b/841294_global/draft deleted file mode 100644 index 28be827..0000000 --- a/841294_global/draft +++ /dev/null @@ -1,62 +0,0 @@ -# Background - -* In #841294, the Technical Committee was asked to overrule the - maintainer of the 'global' package to get a new upstream version - packaged. -* As a matter of fact, at the time #841294 was filed, the 'global' - package's latest upload to unstable had happened in October 2010, - despite several requests for newer 'global' upstream releases and - bugreports. -* The discussion, involving various people ranging from bugreporters, - Debian contributors, the 'global' maintainer, and some TC members, has - clarified two lines of argumentation around the maintenance of the - 'global' package': - - global is fine as it is, version numbers are no silver-bullet, and - there are severe problems in the new upstream versions, that are - being discussed with upstream. New features could always be - backported to the Debian version if worthwhile bugs were reported. - - there's a rightful expectation to get new upstream versions, even if - they introduce regressions or functionality losses. No amount of - upstream problems justify holding new versions back over multiple - release cycles. - -# Rationale - -* Our Social Contract's "We don't hide problems" implies that - maintainers go through reasonable effort to make their packages' - problems visible; and the usual way is to use the Debian bug tracker. - It also implies reporting upstream flaws to upstream, ideally in public. - Adding references to the BTS would avoid the impression that nothing had - been done. -* Integrating recent versions of upstream software is a maintainers' - duty, as Debian is a primarily a software distribution; distributions - exist to facilitate users' access to upstream software. Uploading recent - versions and making them available to Debian users on a somewhat regular - basis is our way to find, address and correct problems brought in by new - upstream releases. The 'experimental' suite exists explicitly for the - purpose of testing software not immediately suitable for release towards - future stable releases. -* If the maintainer decides that our users will be best served by not - upgrading, this should be explicitly stated. The README.Debian file - of the package would be a good place to do this, as well as in response - to bugs requesting upgrades. -* The argument that features could easily be backported would carry - significantly more weight if there was evidence of patches for past - bugs being acted upon in a timely manner. - -# Ballot - -- Option A - Reaffirm Ron Lee as 'global' maintainer (§6.1.2) - -- Option B - Declare Wookey as 'global' maintainer (§6.1.2) - -- Option C - Decline to rule, consider case closed - -- Option FD - Further discussion - -# Closing words - -We invite all interested parties to contribute in good faith for the -best possible 'global' package. Filing bugs with appropriate severities -is every user's duty, and it is important that those who understand the -package best continue to provide their best inputs. diff --git a/resolved_issues/841294_global/draft b/resolved_issues/841294_global/draft new file mode 100644 index 0000000..28be827 --- /dev/null +++ b/resolved_issues/841294_global/draft @@ -0,0 +1,62 @@ +# Background + +* In #841294, the Technical Committee was asked to overrule the + maintainer of the 'global' package to get a new upstream version + packaged. +* As a matter of fact, at the time #841294 was filed, the 'global' + package's latest upload to unstable had happened in October 2010, + despite several requests for newer 'global' upstream releases and + bugreports. +* The discussion, involving various people ranging from bugreporters, + Debian contributors, the 'global' maintainer, and some TC members, has + clarified two lines of argumentation around the maintenance of the + 'global' package': + - global is fine as it is, version numbers are no silver-bullet, and + there are severe problems in the new upstream versions, that are + being discussed with upstream. New features could always be + backported to the Debian version if worthwhile bugs were reported. + - there's a rightful expectation to get new upstream versions, even if + they introduce regressions or functionality losses. No amount of + upstream problems justify holding new versions back over multiple + release cycles. + +# Rationale + +* Our Social Contract's "We don't hide problems" implies that + maintainers go through reasonable effort to make their packages' + problems visible; and the usual way is to use the Debian bug tracker. + It also implies reporting upstream flaws to upstream, ideally in public. + Adding references to the BTS would avoid the impression that nothing had + been done. +* Integrating recent versions of upstream software is a maintainers' + duty, as Debian is a primarily a software distribution; distributions + exist to facilitate users' access to upstream software. Uploading recent + versions and making them available to Debian users on a somewhat regular + basis is our way to find, address and correct problems brought in by new + upstream releases. The 'experimental' suite exists explicitly for the + purpose of testing software not immediately suitable for release towards + future stable releases. +* If the maintainer decides that our users will be best served by not + upgrading, this should be explicitly stated. The README.Debian file + of the package would be a good place to do this, as well as in response + to bugs requesting upgrades. +* The argument that features could easily be backported would carry + significantly more weight if there was evidence of patches for past + bugs being acted upon in a timely manner. + +# Ballot + +- Option A - Reaffirm Ron Lee as 'global' maintainer (§6.1.2) + +- Option B - Declare Wookey as 'global' maintainer (§6.1.2) + +- Option C - Decline to rule, consider case closed + +- Option FD - Further discussion + +# Closing words + +We invite all interested parties to contribute in good faith for the +best possible 'global' package. Filing bugs with appropriate severities +is every user's duty, and it is important that those who understand the +package best continue to provide their best inputs.