Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed7.news.xs4all.nl!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Pierre-Elliott =?utf-8?Q?B=C3=A9cue?= Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Re: Please enable me transfering python-bioblend to Debian Med team Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 21:50:02 +0100 Message-ID: References: X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Wed Dec 22 20:42:15 2021 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.9 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, MEDS=2, MEDS2=2, MURPHY_SCAM1=0.1, PGPSIGNATURE=-5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: using cached result; rate:hard: -3.5 X-Greylist: delayed 5293 seconds by postgrey-1.36 at bendel; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 20:42:00 UTC User-Agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 27.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19606 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/87o858mkx8.fsf@janja.pimeys.fr Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 156 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Cc: Andreas Tille , Steffen =?utf-8?Q?M=C3=B6ller?= , =?utf-8?B?T25kxZllaiBOb3bDvQ==?= , debian-python@lists.debian.org X-Original-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 21:33:17 +0100 X-Original-Message-ID: <87o858mkx8.fsf@janja.pimeys.fr> X-Original-References: <87a6gso8u8.fsf@janja.pimeys.fr> <875yrgo3ko.fsf@janja.pimeys.fr> Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:13794 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Nilesh Patra wrote on 22/12/2021 at 20:45:53+0100: > [[PGP Signed Part:No public key for 00BAE74B343369F1 created at 2021-12-2= 2T20:45:49+0100 using RSA]] > Hi Pierre-Elliot, > > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 08:06:01PM +0100, Pierre-Elliott B=C3=A9cue wrote: >> >> I'm sorry but pressuring to take over a package is not really fine. If >> >> you're not happy with the time it takes for an answer, you can try to >> >> fill an ITS and if the procedure goes to its end then you may take ov= er. >> > >> > Please note: The people involved are the same. We are members of >> > both teams but consider the Debian Med team more appropriate. We >> > are simply missing the permissions to do the move properly. >>=20 >> I am aware of that. >>=20 >> Yet, the fact that you are members of both teams doesn't entitle you to >> decide such a transfer, even if you had the technical rights to do so. > > Hmm, I am not sure what the problem in such a case would be (permission i= n both teams) > Steffen is the maintainer (uploader if you might prefer it that way) and = he has > agreed already[1] -- so what's the problem? > > [1]: https://lists.debian.org/debian-med/2021/12/msg00119.html I guess the problem is that the python-team doesn't seem to have been Cc-ed in your exchange, which was not quoted in the initial mail of this thread. As I'm not subscribed to the list, it really looked like you were intending to take over a package without any maintainer of it having been asked for it before. As it seems not to be the case, it's not the same at all. >> I therefore stand my point: the way Debian is made has not changed >> recently, and taking over still requires a formal approval from the >> maintainer, which you are not. >>=20 >> The only alternatives are either an ITS or MIA team orphaning their >> packages, but as the maintainer is an active team, the latter will not >> happen. > > I do not think it is sensible to take consensus from an entire team to > move a single package. I did not suggest to wait for a consensus, but rather that an admin asks if someone is against and waits for a reasonable delay (72 hours?) and then makes the transfer if they're happy with it. > Honestly speaking, we really do not need to make team transfer debian > processes such a high friction ones -- it just stalls the work for no > good reason. The package has not seen uploads since more than two > years, I really doubt anyone in the team feels strong ly about not > moving it. There is no real difference between teams and individual developers on that part: a take over has to be approved or to follow due procedures, whether we like it or not. Here, as Steffen gave his approval, the topic is a bit moot. > If you are talking about Ond=C5=99ej doing the uploads apart from the > initial uploads, then you probably are also aware that Ond=C5=99ej does a > number of team-maintained package uploads to fix bugs, does updates > and so on (a lot of us do so, for that matter albeit in other teams) I > really don't think that he has a personal interest in every single one > of those packages (including this one) but we should hear from him. I was under the (false) impression that Steffen was not currently available to reply to your query. Ond=C5=99ej being an admin of the team and having done all the uploads apart from those done by Steffen, he clearly seemed the best second contact point to ask this transfer. >> >> and they could be willing to check that no one in the team objects. > > Sure but how are you making a "check" here? I do have admin access in > a few teams, and speaking for myself: I would send out an email to the > list, wait for a time frame (maximum 1 week) and check if someone has > any comments If not, I would make a move. So we already have a mail > in the debian-python mailing list, and no objections so far, so .... > > I would have probably done more to ask for consensus better (asking on > IRC channels etc) but admittedly, we only have 24 hours in the day, > and several dozens of packages to do. Asking globally on the list and waiting a reasonable amount of time for a potential grunt is fine with me. >> I think you missed the second part of my sentence you're quoting. > > I recetified this above. > >> >> Steffen only did the first upload. I'd suggest to contact Ondrej (Cc-= ed). >> >>=20 >> >> In the meantime, Nilesh is member of the Python team and therefore can >> >> do an update of the package (but not change the maintainer). >> > >> > I'm a member myself - but the upload should happen in the Debian >> > Med team. This is the point of my mail. >>=20 >> I disagree. >>=20 >> Either the python team accepts the package to be transferred and it >> indeed should happen there.=20 > > Please don't repeat your points. You wrote the same stuff above (wrt > MIA, ITS etc) If many part of the same mail are raising the same point I prefer repeating these. >> This probably means we should have a stanza in the DPT policy about >> transfer of maintainership. > > This would be definitely helpful. > PS: I do not mean to be disrespectful, please do not interpret my > reply that way, I am only trying to reason it out. I don't. :) =2D-=20 PEB --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJDBAEBCgAtFiEESYqTBWsFJgT6y8ijKb+g0HkpCsoFAmHDjZQPHHBlYkBkZWJp YW4ub3JnAAoJECm/oNB5KQrKJsAP/RrLVeenkRiiGCcbs3jhdpHtlc68VWg8c8Ba PptWCQgkv0HfiFX2g1BP8dAblPdqO2cUAy3sdqG9ZnSdrqFehfagdTCYtvxH2JDs J8BzDTDYmmY8UvhzgSceC9ONqMOGxtxF0NYHmlLY9GCF9BgUE5VEsn2/6pMcT3QO z0JWD3oM7UQzA80OV5yfiq49roHSM9HShX5fHV225K2rTzfFsm2Pj59hkAtVA0cv FcCnf8T5eU47jYUhmW4ek5m0fk73q+UlcvN/9pPKcESCEayTFO8VOCr7PC1O+cJf DcncccYVw+Ldo4/ylzMciz7XTRT7lmF77APyVa/4/2GD6xKB24j6ZljxtruaWuzY 22HS8Y5jXiF7+mBg80GPUeWTVXON0xv0pkbnT/RSe+xlcFBbfRYmSmh/Ku6pQXTx LwiM/cvN+TQ9OfL55uJSMm5x2D8faVg9xYCYFIVu9Gp5MTgvIKChGamk8UdeSHJr eA6hw3nuTvAYOm4OtohqIW28bg1oZNn1EbeBsvnEdwcj7IYaKo/xYr9KL8tciXng mrXpXIwUkY+ewk6lpBX25xQrGWhI07E3XC0DX3lZZPh59MfpCC6vj+1CVnOteaIE /3Sp4dvqPJXxFDsUFcS396/VY3OC5+TtU2MmPT4w4DjCZzo6DJ01oGoqjY92Y53B mfbuRTB8 =tdQO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--