Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #17276

Re: [backintime] Advise about unresponsive DPM and new 1.5.6 release

Path	csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.corradoroberto.it!gothmog.csi.it!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From	Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org>
Newsgroups	linux.debian.maint.python
Subject	Re: [backintime] Advise about unresponsive DPM and new 1.5.6 release
Date	Fri, 19 Dec 2025 01:40:01 +0100
Message-ID	<M3wHf-3Xrt-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<M3wHf-3Xrt-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <M0NEC-23X3-45@gated-at.bofh.it> <M3d1T-3Jvo-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <M3hId-3MKy-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
X-Mailbox-Line	From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Fri Dec 19 00:34:16 2025
Old-Return-Path	<soren@debian.org>
X-Amavis-Spam-Status	No, score=-114.41 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FOURLA=0.1, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, PGPSIGNATURE=-5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, USER_IN_DKIM_WELCOMELIST=-0.01, USER_IN_DKIM_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Organization	Debian
Face	iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAFVBMVEWIg4F7bGiws7ReTkyy kYoXFRrd6/4yMA0PAAACaklEQVQ4y22TwXabMBBFJaPuNZGSNZZp1uhM6BpkJeu4VFk3bsL/f0Lf CHC6qHyOgbl68zTDoIwaVfh3tUopTUGpbFToDiFnY9IY2oMAZYMiS4R9SfbSXepSS5EcFAa/muIU aRj8mkoUqrEraFzhYegBmqig0LyCIyM8DAwPlpBqmJVYaD2UeWZ3abVjsqKIojg+hY4omsyIcNSi qIBM6jJWOveS6kvBeVvHJ+VYzJUW88RmA12UiBx3HEcUMRuzIZI6tBQovTrPclNB3AuUXoXvs0XY C3B2baJpW4Dn2ZpVMInCirkxoyhM1qpK5nFrO65QvCrCqql2DyPgvm94iMQz5/PmISuEotxQGMD5 M5G1N9CjXJ5HQH96BZG2xx6AzejYZccxT4Re3Zr4bPKkCcGcz5Or3dVEABkAUY/znnVcQVVkrXVU vomoEJFe7x4nQuaZmZELL6qnXZGIB5YV/Q2IogtSmyNybEcBX2+QCLOAQYm+gmoORUrYzV7dc6R2 T1WPm45oVEQqsjtoIovHyTmcyxMhVVxTqapomZyLlAmTKC9AmjgamXXGZo+epNrXO3wGGiPRHbKL FnMy2RRgRb1gzFXXGjhICp8wqaTtdtyQH6nWTfkatJvJJoUCbOjSC7wR9/naEVognxrOFdLh7Ugx QpA/0QT4pRV0+u2dqsXD5y9EBDjVAJS3ZZLxmZblgmsU8x7mBeCKg48Py7WU2IiH1epbEbC8K9Ms y0cpcySVUcdQVrBY+rEsv+XpYgFKXT8B3v2yATxv8fKK2EfC358tsIMLYqfD401xA0j1EY4P/wWf IbhlOWyBv4OQsywBM8MAAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC
MIME-Version	1.0
Content-Type	multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1882146.VLH7GnMWUR"; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Debian-User	soren
X-Mailing-List	<debian-python@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/23513
List-ID	<debian-python.lists.debian.org>
List-URL	<https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/>
List-Archive	https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/6151623.MhkbZ0Pkbq@soren-desktop
Approved	robomod@news.nic.it
Lines	89
Sender	robomod@news.nic.it
X-Original-Cc	c.buhtz@posteo.jp
X-Original-Date	Thu, 18 Dec 2025 17:33:50 -0700
X-Original-Message-ID	<6151623.MhkbZ0Pkbq@soren-desktop>
X-Original-References	<e45e39fbb19ccfad6c7b66ac5c13a0d7@posteo.de> <a8b92b62-52be-496a-b12c-b48fb31b178b@ubuntu.com> <7f0c8726d196f7652a6fc3c1659a8e2e@posteo.de>
Xref	csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:17276

Show key headers only | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

On Thursday, December 18, 2025 1:35:55 AM Mountain Standard Time 
c.buhtz@posteo.jp wrote:
> Hello Soren and Thomas,
> thank you very much for your feedback and kind words. Even this is
> somehow helpful for me and my mood.
> 
> In my understanding the DPT would take over the package but only if the
> current maintainer says OK to it.
> Anyway.

That isn’t actually correct.  The policy is that the Debian Packaging Team (or 
any team in Debian except for the QA team, which only handles packages that 
have been abandoned) does not maintain a package unless at least one human 
maintainer is listed by name in the Uploaders field.  That Uploader is the 
primary maintainer of the package.  The rest of the team is only a backup.

For example, see python-electrum-ecc, which has two uploaders:

https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/python-electrum-ecc

Or python-construct-classes with one uploader:

https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/python-construct-classes

backintime lists one Maintainer and two Uploaders.

https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/backintime

Based on what you have said I assume all three are inactive.  If someone wants 
to salvage the package, they can choose to move it under the Debian Python 
Team, but they must put themselves in the Uploaders field, which is a 
commitment for them to maintain it going forward.

> I also think that upstream maintainers shouldn't do Debian maintenance
> also. An upstream maintainer is IMHO not objective enough.
> But I also know this is not reality today. I can speak only for myself I
> shouldn't do both jobs. To risky to introduce or break things by
> accident.

I can respect that.  But I can tell you that in my personal case I am both the 
upstream developer and the Debian maintainer for Privacy Browser, and it has 
worked out well for the package.

-- 
Soren Stoutner
soren@debian.org

Back to linux.debian.maint.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar

Thread

[backintime] Advise about unresponsive DPM and new 1.5.6 release c.buhtz@posteo.jp - 2025-12-11 13:10 +0100
  Re: [backintime] Advise about unresponsive DPM and new 1.5.6 release Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2025-12-18 03:50 +0100
    Re: [backintime] Advise about unresponsive DPM and new 1.5.6 release Thomas Ward <teward@ubuntu.com> - 2025-12-18 04:40 +0100
      Re: [backintime] Advise about unresponsive DPM and new 1.5.6 release c.buhtz@posteo.jp - 2025-12-18 09:40 +0100
        Re: [backintime] Advise about unresponsive DPM and new 1.5.6 release Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2025-12-19 01:40 +0100

csiph-web