Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.devel > #117189

Re: ITN procedure?

From Wookey <wookey@wookware.org>
Newsgroups linux.debian.devel
Subject Re: ITN procedure?
Date 2025-05-10 12:30 +0200
Message-ID <KKPCV-2468-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (1 earlier) <KJOIV-1oFJ-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <KJPbX-1oQ0-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <KJStb-1r6z-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <KJTyW-1rLu-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <KK4ul-1yZB-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization Wookware

Show all headers | View raw

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

On 2025-05-08 10:00 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
>Am Wed, May 07, 2025 at 10:27:03PM +0200 schrieb Jonas Smedegaard:

>> Can we please stop calling it an intent to NMU when it is invasive?
>
>You're right--"Intent To NMU" is a misleading name for this. I'd gladly
>adopt a better term, and I appreciate any honest suggestion. Naming is
>hard, so thanks for helping.

ITM Modernise   
ITU Update
ITR Revamp
move-to-collective-maintainership (failing to think a good short name here - maybe:)
ITC Collectivise ?
ITPM Publically Maintain

I think the underlying tension here is that this is really about
moving the package from a strong-maintainer model to a
collective-maintainship model, and that is still somewhat
controversial.

Like Jonas I really don't think re-use of 'NMU' is appropriate here.
I wouldn't put it quite as strongly as he did (that seemed rather too
aggressive, when we know Andreas is a decent chap, trying to help),
but I agree with his points.

The move from archive to git+salsa is significant and whilst it _is_
reversible that would be work (and I think 'going backwards' like this
would be disapproved-of by quite a chunk of DMs/DDs) so it's quite a
one-way thing in practice, which is why 'NMU' (under existing rules)
is definitely the wrong name.

So long as the maintainer really is long-gone/disinterested this
process makes sense, but if there _is_ still a willing maintainer then
Jonas' reaction is quite right - it's a big imposition/change and definitely
not just an 'NMU'. 

Giving it a name that makes clear the status-change of the package
should avoid confusion and argument.

Of the various names I think 'Revamp' might actually be the best, as it avoids the value-judgement implicit in 'Update' and 'Modernise'.
And in 10 years time it could be re-used for some other significant packaging change when we have moved on to new debates.

'Collectivise' perhaps gets to the underlying issue better, but is
perhaps too specific to this _particular_ revamping, and would look
silly in a decade or two when we have other issues.

So yeah, please pick a better name, and be mindful that
'collectivising' packages is a big change, even if it feels like a
simple 'updating' to those already in that world.

Wookey
-- 
Principal hats:  Debian, Wookware
http://wookware.org/

Back to linux.debian.devel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

ITN procedure? Phil Wyett <philip.wyett@kathenas.org> - 2025-05-07 09:40 +0200
  Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org> - 2025-05-07 17:20 +0200
    Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-07 17:50 +0200
      Re: ITN procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-07 19:00 +0200
        Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-07 20:00 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2025-05-07 23:30 +0200
        Re: ITN procedure? Joost van Baal-Ilić <joostvb-debian@mdcc.cx> - 2025-05-08 06:10 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 08:20 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-08 08:50 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Phil Wyett <philip.wyett@kathenas.org> - 2025-05-08 09:30 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 09:10 +0200
            Categorially refusing to exercise DPL powers (was: ITN procedure?) "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2025-05-08 10:00 +0200
              Re: Categorially refusing to exercise DPL powers (was: ITN  procedure?) Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-08 10:20 +0200
                Re: Categorially refusing to exercise DPL powers (was: ITN  procedure?) "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2025-05-08 10:50 +0200
                Re: Categorially refusing to exercise DPL powers (was: ITN procedure?) Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 21:40 +0200
      Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-07 21:20 +0200
        Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-07 22:30 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 00:40 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 02:00 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Tiago Bortoletto Vaz <tiago@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 04:40 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure? Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> - 2025-05-11 12:10 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-08 10:10 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-08 10:50 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 11:20 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure? Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 10:50 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-08 10:10 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-08 10:30 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-08 10:40 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Alexandre Detiste <alexandre.detiste@gmail.com> - 2025-05-08 10:50 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Bálint Réczey <balint@balintreczey.hu> - 2025-05-08 17:00 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 20:40 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-08 20:50 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Bill Allombert <ballombe@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 21:00 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-08 22:00 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-09 06:20 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-09 09:50 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-09 10:30 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-09 11:30 +0200
                RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-09 10:30 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-09 12:50 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-09 13:00 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Bálint Réczey <balint@balintreczey.hu> - 2025-05-10 12:30 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-11 22:40 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-05-11 23:40 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 00:00 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 00:30 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 01:00 +0200
                git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-12 09:50 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference Richard Lewis <richard.lewis.debian@googlemail.com> - 2025-05-12 10:10 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-12 10:40 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-05-12 11:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-12 13:20 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Bálint Réczey <balint@balintreczey.hu> - 2025-05-12 13:30 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-12 14:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-14 10:50 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-05-14 11:20 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org> - 2025-05-14 11:30 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference Ananthu C V <weepingclown@disroot.org> - 2025-05-14 12:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> - 2025-05-14 12:10 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Peter B <peter@pblackman.plus.com> - 2025-05-14 12:10 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-14 13:50 +0200
                debian/upstream/metadata (Re: git branches vs debian specific git  tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference) Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> - 2025-05-14 14:30 +0200
                Re: debian/upstream/metadata (Re: git branches vs debian specific git  tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference) Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-05-14 21:00 +0200
                Re: debian/upstream/metadata (Re: git branches vs debian specific git  tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference) Julien Plissonneau Duquène <sre4ever@free.fr> - 2025-05-18 22:50 +0200
                Re: debian/upstream/metadata (Re: git branches vs debian specific  git tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference) Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-21 14:50 +0200
                Re: debian/upstream/metadata (Re: git branches vs debian specific git  tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference) Julien Plissonneau Duquène <sre4ever@free.fr> - 2025-05-26 13:20 +0200
                Re: debian/upstream/metadata (Re: git branches vs debian specific  git tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference) Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-26 13:50 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2025-05-14 11:50 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-05-14 12:30 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-05-14 11:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> - 2025-05-17 01:10 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 23:40 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-05-13 17:50 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-12 11:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Marc Haber <mh+debian-devel@zugschlus.de> - 2025-05-12 10:30 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 10:40 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Santiago Vila <sanvila@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 12:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 12:40 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues <josch@debian.org> - 2025-05-13 16:40 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@debian.org> - 2025-05-13 17:20 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) thomas@goirand.fr - 2025-05-13 18:20 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 15:10 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> - 2025-05-12 17:00 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 20:20 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 23:30 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference Julien Plissonneau Duquène <sre4ever@free.fr> - 2025-05-16 16:10 +0200
                Re: git branches vs debian specific git tools (Re: RFC for changes  regarding NMU in developers reference gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org> - 2025-05-18 16:20 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN procedure?) Bálint Réczey <balint@balintreczey.hu> - 2025-05-11 23:50 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 10:10 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> - 2025-05-14 09:50 +0200
                Re: RFC for changes regarding NMU in developers reference (Was: ITN  procedure?) Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org> - 2025-05-14 10:30 +0200
              Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-08 11:30 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-08 14:30 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? thomas@goirand.fr - 2025-05-08 15:40 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-08 18:00 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Andreas Metzler <ametzler@bebt.de> - 2025-05-08 18:50 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-08 21:10 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2025-05-08 21:20 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Andreas Metzler <ametzler@bebt.de> - 2025-05-09 19:20 +0200
                Re: Intend To Orphan (ITO) procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-12 15:50 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-08 10:10 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-08 11:00 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Wookey <wookey@wookware.org> - 2025-05-10 12:30 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2025-05-12 17:00 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure - more words, fewer acronyms please? Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2025-05-12 19:20 +0200
                Re: ITN procedure - more words, fewer acronyms please? Wookey <wookey@wookware.org> - 2025-05-13 15:50 +0200
          Re: ITN procedure? thomas@goirand.fr - 2025-05-08 13:40 +0200
            Re: ITN procedure? Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> - 2025-05-08 13:50 +0200
              Re: ITN procedure? thomas@goirand.fr - 2025-05-08 14:00 +0200
      Re: ITN procedure? gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org> - 2025-05-07 22:50 +0200

csiph-web