|In light of the rather nasty debate in the KDE story below, I thought it would be a good idea to solicit suggestions for a solution to the issue of large packaging projects getting hung up on one person’s limited availability and/or abilities. Both sides present a valid case — developers volunteering their time do not deserve to be put down for their mistakes or a lack of time, yet if they are unable to do a job, especially when others are willing and able to do it, then those people should be given that chance. What do you think is a good solution to this problem?
By the way, I’m not a Debian developer, just an avid user who knows what it’s like when many people are in need of my time. The idea that seems most natural to me is to setup some official CVS servers for the development of large packages, and ensure that no one person ever has ultimate control over the archive, kind of a Debian-centric Sourceforge. But again, I’ve not been there, so I’m more interested in what you all think. Please be friendly and give constructive comments. 🙂
Robot101: People interested in seeing Openoffice in Debian have done just that, and have recently announced that they were using a CVS archive to co-ordinate their work. I expect we’ll see more of this kind of thing for large packages such as this. Even though it may not be obvious, many large packages such as X, glibc, dpkg, apache2 and gcc do already recieve significant help from groups of regular contributors, and anyone can help with any package by posting a patch to the BTS.
However it will be much harder to disperse the idea that developers have ‘ultimate control’ over their packages – whether this is a good thing or not. Theoretically the technical comittee can override them if they reach consensus, but it never has and currently has difficulty responding to issues raised, let alone reaching a consensus.