[DRE-maint] Moving away from uploaders.mk

[Patrick]

Gunnar Wolf schrieb:
> [  back from VAC - That's why I'm resurrecting this old thread. I hope
>    I'm still in time to influence it ]
>
> Lucas Nussbaum dijo [Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 10:18:54PM +0100]:
>   
>> I think that we should move away from the Uploaders rule. As discussed
>> in this thread in debian-devel[0], it is clearly not the best
>> organization. This scheme matches our organization the best:
>>
>>  Maintainer: the main person responsible for the package
>>  Uploaders: team address + other members willing to help with this
>>     package
>>     
>
> Yes... Shame, the pkg-ruby-extras way looked quite nice for me - In
> fact, I was pushing for pkg-perl to go that way [1] :)
>
> Anwyay, I'd like to suggest pkg-perl's way: 'Maintainer' is not used
> to list an individual, but the group address. When a bug is reported
> against any pkg-perl maintained package, it gets sent to one of our
> mailing lists. Of course, I'm listed as the uploader for the packages
> I have touched and worked with.
>
> Why putting team as the maintainer instead of as an uploader? First,
> because the team address is completely virtual - there is no single
> human behind it, and it just cannot ever produce an upload (or so I
> hope, at least ;-) ). Second, because the very essence of team
> maintainership is to kill feuds, to undo the "this is mine precious
> package" culture. Any team member is welcome to work on any of the
> packages - Of course, inside the team and as an inter-human thing, we
> can split responsabilities and keep track of who's the guy who cares
> about libfoo-ruby... But the package metadata does not need to reflect
> it. 
>
>   
>> (...)
>> I propose the following procedure to change this:
>>
>> 1/ Every package is modified in svn, to:
>>    * no longer include uploaders.mk
>>    * no longer use control.in
>>    * modify Uploaders to only include the team address
>>     
>
> I love to get rid of control.in ;-)
>
>   
>> 2/ Before a deadline (2 weeks ?) every member of the team add himself to
>> the Uploaders field of every package he cares about.
>>     
>
> Umh... If the maintainer is set to the team mailing list (we could
> create a second mailing list, mandatory for team members, to receive
> bug reports - Or they can just come to this list? What do you think?),
> we will all get the bug reports. I hope there is not a terrible flurry
> of reports coming in at any given time to get us all too tired ;-)
>
>   
>> 3/ All packages are uploaded again, if another version is not going to
>> be uploaded very soon.
>>     
>
> Umh... I'd like to avoid this step, to just fix them as we upload
> them. It's just noise. But that's _my_ personal preference.
>
>   
>> 4/ Eventually, we will remove uploaders.mk.
>>     
>
> Yay! Hopefully, this will be quickish. The group does not have that
> many packages yet :)
>
> [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-perl/2007/01/msg00005.html
>   
Heh, as I can see our perl neighboars are criticizing your idea of the 
UPLOADERS field, which I fully agree with. But I dont know why they dont 
like CDBS .. it simplifies things so much .. packaging being a breeze 
then tho :)


regards,
Patrick