[Pkg-samba-maint] Ready to upload some samba build dependencies to unstable

[Steve Langasek]

On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 06:49:13AM +0200, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Technically speaking, we need to decide officially upon team
> maintenance for these 3 packages (for teven, Jelmber IIRC clearly
> stated he prefers the package not to be considered team-maintained
> ATM) and, if so, update Maintainer and Uploaders accordingly (still to
> be done in git)

Jelmer is currently the maintainer and has stated his clear preference that
they not be team maintained.  So unless Jelmer says otherwise, I think the
only reasonable course of action here would be to NMU.

> These uploads are in the git repo under tdb-new, talloc-new, ldb-new,
> all these being ready for git-buildpackage, including the pristine-tar
> branch. As it seems that Jelmer hadn't time enough to upload his own
> copies, it seems fair so me that we now officially adopt the new git
> repos (particularly if we agree on the packages being
> team-maintained).

However, I don't understand why you've pushed these to completely separate
git repositories.  Indeed, looking at tdb vs. tdb-new, it seems that *none*
of the commit history is shared with Jelmer's existing repository (i.e., all
the commit ids are different), in spite of the fact that the contents are
completely identical up through May of last year.  Unless I've overlooked
some discussion with Jelmer as to why the existing repos were broken and
needed reimported, this looks very wrong to me.  This ought to have been
done using the existing tdb.git repository and pushed as a separate branch.
I don't know how this tdb-new repository was prepared, but it looks like a
completely separate import from bzr done with different options, which has a
significant negative impact on merging the result into the official
repository - whether that's as an NMU or as a blessed MU of a
newly-team-maintained package.

If I were in Jelmer's shoes, this alone would be cause for concern wrt
moving these packages under team maintenance.  It's quite impossible to team
maintain without a shared workflow.

So I think this supports the conclusion that you should proceed with an NMU
of these packages to unstable, and decouple this from the team maintenance
question.

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek at ubuntu.com                                     vorlon at debian.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-samba-maint/attachments/20130726/20458683/attachment.sig>