Hi team,
Sorry for the subject, this mail is more like questions than given ideas
:-).
After reading the DPL's contact and its responses, it got me
thinking - and this is also a personal feeling - that the DPT is a
place where I can seek help. This is beneficial because we understand
that if we encounter a Debian packaging issue specific to Python, we
can expect a prompt response from experienced people within the team.
However, it's true that each one maintains their own packages, while
some others fix RC bugs. But IMHO we lack like clear direction to follow
as a team. While ultimately, we just need to ensure that the packages
under the DPT umbrella are up-to-date with upstream and free of RC bugs as
much as possible. I don't know if that 'direction' is needed.
I understand that our team's priority is to address 3.12 bugs [0], as
mentioned in the irc topic. I know that some people are already
working on this, and they don't necessarily need to seek permission
before tackling an RC bug. However, perhaps we could attempt to organize
our efforts better. Maybe we could identify packages that are candidates
for removal like [1] and try to reduce the list of RC bugs. Another
question is: what should we do with packages that are not under the
team's umbrella but are affecting Python 3.12?
On the other hand, we could assess if there are any improvements needed
in our tools, such as pybuild, or determine which packages require, for instance, autopkgtests, lintian, etc. Or maybe we can start making short
IRC meetings once a week or every two weeks? Experienced members
of the team, do you think this is feasible given the DPT workflow? I
would like to hear the opinion from the team :-)
[0]
https://deb.li/3T4QN
[1]
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1025181
cheers,
Emmanuel Arias
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁
eamanu@debian.org
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: FA9DEC5DE11C63F1
⠈⠳⣄
<div dir="ltr">Hi team,<br><br>Sorry for the subject, this mail is more like questions than given ideas<br>:-).<br><br>After reading the DPL's contact and its responses, it got me<br>thinking - and this is also a personal feeling - that the DPT is a<
place where I can seek help. This is beneficial because we understand<br>that if we encounter a Debian packaging issue specific to Python, we<br>can expect a prompt response from experienced people within the team.<br><br>However, it's true that
each one maintains their own packages, while<br>some others fix RC bugs. But IMHO we lack like clear direction to follow<br>as a team. While ultimately, we just need to ensure that the packages<br>under the DPT umbrella are up-to-date with upstream and
free of RC bugs as<br>much as possible. I don't know if that 'direction' is needed.<br><br>I understand that our team's priority is to address 3.12 bugs [0], as<br>mentioned in the irc topic. I know that some people are already<br>
working on this, and they don't necessarily need to seek permission<br>before tackling an RC bug. However, perhaps we could attempt to organize<br>our efforts better. Maybe we could identify packages that are candidates<br>for removal like [1] and
try to reduce the list of RC bugs. Another<br>question is: what should we do with packages that are not under the<br>team's umbrella but are affecting Python 3.12?<br><br>On the other hand, we could assess if there are any improvements needed<br>in
our tools, such as pybuild, or determine which packages require, for<br>instance, autopkgtests, lintian, etc. Or maybe we can start making short<br>IRC meetings once a week or every two weeks? Experienced members<br>of the team, do you think this is
feasible given the DPT workflow? I<br>would like to hear the opinion from the team :-)<br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><font face="monospace"><br></font></div><div><font face=
"monospace"><br></font></div><div><font face="monospace">[0] </font><a href="
https://deb.li/3T4QN">https://deb.li/3T4QN</a></div><div><font face="monospace">[1] </font><a href="
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1025181">https://bugs.
debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1025181</a></div><div><br></div><div><font face="monospace"><br></font></div><div><font face="monospace">cheers,</font></div><div><font face="monospace"> Emmanuel Arias</font></div><div><font face="
monospace"><br></font></div><div><font face="monospace"> ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀</font></div><div><font face="monospace"> ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ <a href="mailto:
eamanu@debian.org" target="_blank">
eamanu@debian.org</a></font></div><div><font face="
monospace"> ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: </font><span style="font-family:monospace">FA9DEC5DE11C63F1</span></div><div><font face="monospace"> ⠈⠳⣄</font></div></div></div></div></div>
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)