Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Emmanuel Arias Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Re: Suggesting change in DPT policy Date: Sun, 03 Mar 2024 00:40:02 +0100 Message-ID: References: X-Original-To: Andreas Tille X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Sat Mar 2 23:29:59 2024 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.41 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, BODY_8BITS=1.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FOURLA=0.1, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, PGPSIGNATURE=-5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: NOT_IN_SBL_XBL_SPAMHAUS=-1.5 CL_IP_EQ_HELO_IP=-2 (check from: .yaerobi. - helo: .mail-ot1-x336.google. - helo-domain: .google.) FROM/MX_MATCHES_HELO(DOMAIN)=-2; rate: -5.5 X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyXLZ7dmGnz4uPevnnJzsMZyzou6e2rNSQmhk3t5hV+0ZAz4BEZ 79jEZst+Y370zaRz4mHMJVVp7VZbszNpAS8dbL/ydqcIl2TGQ/4hyWc9SKJykYlLyUYYpQfBKM6 XB7I= X-Google-SMTP-Source: AGHT+IGI0JjomXyrAov53sVQrpzX9LpaNCOb6mwoFZ1loTlVyV74KGzIDVGRF9HYJCl0LFPCbdxYpQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:1150:b0:6e4:dabc:ae13 with SMTP id x16-20020a056830115000b006e4dabcae13mr1958081otq.18.1709422169413; Sat, 02 Mar 2024 15:29:29 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="OfuMBp2kZ46RjhP1" Content-Disposition: inline X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/21525 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/ZeO2VRECvmGN_hke@debian Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 143 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Cc: Debian Python X-Original-Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2024 20:29:25 -0300 X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-References: Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:15540 --OfuMBp2kZ46RjhP1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 09:05:44AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi, >=20 > I became more deeply involved into DPT since 2022 as a consequence of > the suggestion for transfering several Debian Med/Science packages to > DPMT[1][2]. I happily followed this suggestion and moved >30 packages > from the Blends teams to DPT. I was happy with this move since it makes > sense. >=20 > Recently we received lots of testing removal warnings in those Blends > teams due to RC bugs caused by Cython 3.0 and Python3.12 migrations. So > I did what I usually do in those teams: I dedicated quite some time in > team wide bug hunting. That way I squashed about 50 bugs on packages > where I was not in Uploaders. When doing so I usually run > routine-update on the package which basically streamlines packaging to > latest standards including calling Janitor tools which are so far > accepted inside DPT. >=20 > I probably should have reviewed the DPT policy on Maintainership[3] more > carefully. In other teams, it's common for the Maintainer to be set to > the team, so I assumed it was just an oversight when I made this > change[4] when touching the package to fix RC bug #1058177. However, I > I was pointed immediately about the fact that I was mistaken according > to the current DPT policy. I apologize for this. However, the wording > of the comment on my commit was discouraging, especially considering I > was a volunteer who had fixed a critical bug. Because of this, I > decided to focus my efforts on fixing other critical bugs for the > moment. If the comment had started with a 'Thanks for fixing the > critical bug, but...' I likely would have corrected my mistake quickly. > The lack of respect from my teammate simply made me prioritize my time > on other issues that are more visible to our users. I wonder whether I > should propose another change to the policy about maintaining a kind and > polite language inside the team - but that's a different thing. >=20 > While I applied the patch for another RC bug (#1063443) after >2 weeks > which triggered a RC bug in reportbug I remembered the "keep the > maintainer" policy. But I kept on doing Janitor like changes since > finally the package is maintained in a team where Janitor is accepted. > When doing so I failed the phrase "please contact the Maintainer for the > green light." I apoligize for this again. The response was another > volunteer-demotivating private mail (thus no quote) which also was > lacking the "Thanks for fixing"-phrase and degrading my changes as > "frivolous". >=20 > So far what happened (seen from my possibly biased perspective). >=20 > Why do I like to change the policy? >=20 > The current wording provides some means to stop volunteer team members > helping out moving forward to speed up migrations and fix Debian wide > dependencies. It hides team maintained packages from a common BTS > view. When pointing my browser to > https://bugs.debian.org/team+python@tracker.debian.org > I currently see 1339 open bugs (calculated by [UDD1]). This hides > another 309 [UDD2] bugs (>18% of team bugs) from our sight. To work > around this flaw I used an UDD query to find relevant Python3.12 bugs. >=20 > When I think twice about the wording > Team in Uploaders is a weak statement of collaboration.[3] > I personally consider it a statement of *no* collaboration (which fits > the wording of the responses I've got). >=20 > How can a team member for instance find another RC bug #1009424? Just > from reading the bug report it is pretty easy to fix but does not > feature any response in BTS. I came across this while looking into > Cython 3.0 bugs. The same source package (basemap) that had the open > Cython bug (#1056789, tagged patch since 2023-12-09) is featuring RC bug > (#1009424) that stayed unattended for 22 months? We all know volunteers > have limited time and I do not want to blame anybody in the team to not > care promptly about RC bugs. But what else is the sense of a packaging > team than stepping in situations for long standing RC bugs and RC bugs > tagged patch? >=20 > This kind of situation wouldn't occur in teams where collaboration is > strong and communication is effective. My motivation to address these > long-ignored critical bugs diminishes when the maintainer opts for > "weak" cooperation and lacks respectful communication with potential > helpers. I see no difference to simply do a NMU. >=20 > I've checked the current situation who is actually using the DPT team as > Uploaders[UDD3]. 66 of the 73 maintainers have less than 5 packages > some of these "Maintainers" are other teams and lots of the persons > listed as Maintainer are known to be MIA. This means the packages are > de-facto not maintained which is most probably an unwanted effect of the > current policy. I know other maintainers from other teams to be fine > with stronger team understanding. >=20 > Since I consider the current situation as demotivating for newcomers > as well as long standing contributors I would like to suggest to drop > this "weak statement of collaboration" option from policy. I've attached > an according patch to the team policy[5]. I'm fine with creating a MR > to be discussed rather in Salsa than this mailing list - whatever seems > worthwhile to you. +1 for this DPT policy change. When I started to contribute I received these kind of comments that made me think if I could really start contributing to Debian. As time went by, I learned to read first who is the maintainer of the package before read the bug reported, no matter if the package is (apparently) under the DPT umbrella. --=20 cheers, Emmanuel Arias =E2=A2=80=E2=A3=B4=E2=A0=BE=E2=A0=BB=E2=A2=B6=E2=A3=A6=E2=A0=80 =E2=A3=BE=E2=A0=81=E2=A2=A0=E2=A0=92=E2=A0=80=E2=A3=BF=E2=A1=81 eamanu@de= bian.org =E2=A2=BF=E2=A1=84=E2=A0=98=E2=A0=B7=E2=A0=9A=E2=A0=8B=E2=A0=80 OpenPGP: = 13796755BBC72BB8ABE2AEB5 FA9DEC5DE11C63F1 =20 =E2=A0=88=E2=A0=B3=E2=A3=84 --OfuMBp2kZ46RjhP1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEE3lnVbvHK7ir4q61+p3sXeEcY/EFAmXjtlQACgkQ+p3sXeEc Y/H3JRAAhDIxG1x4WdsNyssZ4oRL9WEXw4HugxPBh4qjX3wJPO8xYjEXJZd3+KyO iRhFsAT4vJuuDDyjiSIYV+IhKQ27hYJ8G+NXegu34G4+uP3HEIuJTrg/OWaU8T55 DoqWUli5y/y8shTwSm9zJaAkhLXkuP3/9bPS8nT3ZfFK4RmyU/dOIjfpL0URxXFM MR0OWCP/UvnqjItg53nf7+lVOn7CSw01GhlrQEgH2ZBl1LDf6LW5JDpEsl8giu7Z rUzR11sq9q6wRj/aCwaLY/SHRR1adPK0++WF4jRSqKrFQanAUkQzl37cZOkQ03Ir ZRqBctHH9qnt38K1qw+de+rJgYo6QB82+MY4hfPS0ik5yJDWjd5Vm1N155DIeIwV hMuyk4rxOjNWBPT9qTuB40AQVMzkhppi1bo4GDoUibhR+mbKRX1jgv+7Y+HbXREw hT1NTJOUiWuLGa1FAxOOcSmgXdUsj+0wheKovZ+FJJBQAK8kdvJKokIurDkKpujI TGCzc0IU/6jN9+xoLblSqef8gT5Wc5H60UR5nSlCXPUYZBJjTH2NivbohTcZtTV5 pTg15wQwrfASX2wiv+H2svLwSvnqtvYql/CuJCbWnEM4pjhH/iN2ef5661Wqor/e Ns1nudZQBmcArzg3ie1vmKBFSQx5v9XgjGo7zogKid83bEsIwSw= =BCor -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --OfuMBp2kZ46RjhP1--