1 |
Hi all, |
2 |
|
3 |
From what I've read on the list recently, there's a lot of demand for |
4 |
non-maintainer updates to ebuilds. Esp. with the upcoming Git migration, |
5 |
I predict there will be a much larger influx of changes from users. |
6 |
|
7 |
Some developers (eg myself) have a general policy [2] that we send out |
8 |
to the list occasionally welcome everybody to touch our packages (so |
9 |
long as they own their breakages). A few packages discouraged touching |
10 |
due to fragility, but mostly we were a very open society. |
11 |
|
12 |
Back in the days of "The Old Ones", this was a general practice for all |
13 |
developers, but somewhere along the line, some developers seem to have |
14 |
grown territorial of their ebuilds. |
15 |
|
16 |
Debian has their own NMU process: |
17 |
http://wiki.debian.org/NonMaintainerUpload |
18 |
http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#nmu |
19 |
With a long whitelist of devs/teams that welcome it: |
20 |
http://wiki.debian.org/LowThresholdNmu |
21 |
|
22 |
So I'd like to hear input on how developers & users (esp |
23 |
proxy-maintainers) on maybe writing a NMU GLEP. |
24 |
|
25 |
I'm open to all input, but here's some initial questions I'd like to |
26 |
hear your answers to: |
27 |
- How should developers, herds & teams communicate how welcome they are |
28 |
to NMU changes on their packages? |
29 |
- to humans? |
30 |
- to automated scripts? |
31 |
- where? metadata.xml? |
32 |
- What sorts of changes (see Debian NMU): |
33 |
- Are welcome? |
34 |
- Are prohibited? |
35 |
- Are somewhere between the two? |
36 |
- Does this need to be controlled per-package? |
37 |
- What about upstream-rejected changes? |
38 |
- How do we encourage responsible ownership of changes that cause |
39 |
breakage? [1] |
40 |
|
41 |
1. I've been leading infra for a few years now, and I've got a few |
42 |
ground rules, maybe we can run with parts of those: |
43 |
- If you break something, own up ASAP; there will be no punishment, just |
44 |
help in getting it fixed. |
45 |
- You're responsible for many people's systems/access/privacy, don't |
46 |
abuse it. |
47 |
(Ciaranm: since you were talking about lack of honesty of corporate |
48 |
cultures in response to my previous mail, here's your chance again). |
49 |
|
50 |
2. This isn't entirely selfless, I want to have to tell people less that |
51 |
they can go and touch most of my packages WITHOUT asking me or waiting |
52 |
for me to reply to a bug. |
53 |
|
54 |
-- |
55 |
Robin Hugh Johnson |
56 |
Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee & Infrastructure Lead |
57 |
E-Mail : robbat2@g.o |
58 |
GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85 |