Re: Bug#908681: libsane1: pointless package rename

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Bug#908681: libsane1: pointless package rename

John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
Hello Lauren!

Is there any reason why you are hijacking the package here and overriding
a maintainer's decision without contacting the Debian CTTE?

Thanks,
Adrian

--
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - [hidden email]
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - [hidden email]
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Bug#908681: libsane1: pointless package rename

Paul Tagliamonte-3
Was this a hijack or NMU? I saw a NMU to DELAYED with a log in the bug announcing it. I may have missed something

paultag

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Bug#908681: libsane1: pointless package rename

John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
On 11/6/18 12:04 AM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> Was this a hijack or NMU? I saw a NMU to DELAYED with a log
> in the bug announcing it. I may have missed something

I'm the sponsor, I was not put in the loop over this decision
and Joerg may not have been available the past three days.

Joerg Frings-Fuerst as the maintainer made a decision. That decision
was not accepted by Julien who opened an RC bug. Joerg disagreed with
that but felt he didn't have any voice against a member of the stable
release team.

Then Laurent came around, not knowing the discussion and uploaded a
an NMU just informing the maintainer not me with just a three days
heads-up and now we have another person overriding a maintainer's
decision.

I'm not sure why that upload happened.

Adrian

--
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - [hidden email]
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - [hidden email]
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Bug#908681: libsane1: pointless package rename

Laurent Bigonville-5
In reply to this post by John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
Le 5/11/18 à 23:54, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz a écrit :
> Hello Lauren!
Hello,
> Is there any reason why you are hijacking the package here and overriding
> a maintainer's decision without contacting the Debian CTTE?

This bug is open for more than a month without any recent reaction from
the maintainer, multiple people have asked for the status over the month
of October (including mails addressed directly to the maintainer), nothing.

This is/was blocking the migration of some packages to testing (at least
one from GNOME, that's why I start caring).

I felt reading
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=908681#99 that some
kind of consensus was reached, that was maybe incorrect.

Not much more to say here.

Laurent Bigonville who just spent his last care replying to this mail.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Bug#908681: libsane1: pointless package rename

John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
Hi Laurent!

On 11/6/18 2:09 AM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> This bug is open for more than a month without any recent reaction from the maintainer, multiple people have asked for the status over the month of October (including mails addressed directly to the maintainer), nothing.

That bug was forced upon the maintainer. He made his decision, others disagreed
and used their positions to push their opinion on him. However, so far I have not
seen any reference to the Debian Policy which grants such a particular right.

> This is/was blocking the migration of some packages to testing (at least one from GNOME, that's why I start caring).

That was not Joerg's fault. He maintained his package with a lot of diligence
while no one else was interested in maintaining this package.

> I felt reading https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=908681#99 that some kind of consensus was reached, that was maybe incorrect.

There was no consensus from the maintainer. There were people pushing on Joerg,
you jumping on the bandwagon and forcing the change on him. Again, no justification
with reference to corresponding parts of the Debian Policy.

> Not much more to say here.

So you think it's acceptable to override maintainer decisions without the CTTE
which is supposed to be used in this context? Would you be okay for this to
be done with your packages, too?

> Laurent Bigonville who just spent his last care replying to this mail.

Not sure I understand what you mean?

Thanks,
Adrian

--
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - [hidden email]
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - [hidden email]
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913