From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Wong Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2021 22:09:09 +0000 Subject: Re: [mlmmj] distribution "dead upstream" discussion Message-Id: <20210121220909.GA32302@dcvr> List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: mlmmj@mlmmj.org Chris Knadle wrote: > Today I was contacted and asked about the status of mlmmj upstream because > from the point of view of the outside world it looks dead; the mailing list > archive stopped working in Dec 2017, there's no new commits to the Mercurial > or Git repositories since 2017, and thus no indication that MLMMJ is > "alive". > > I happen to be on the mlmmj "discussion" mailing list because I maintain the > 'mlmmj' package in Debian, so I took the time to read through the "Is this > list active? Where is "upstream"??" and similar threads, and I see that > there's a Git repo fork at https://gitlab.com/mlmmj/mlmmj and had a look at > it ... but nobody from the outside world can see that this exists, because > that repo is not mentioned on the website nor the mailing list archives. Hi Chris, thanks for maintaining mlmmj for Debian! For one, I can't use GitLab due to the CAPTCHA and JS requirements. I find bugs, I'll report bugs via the Debian BTS, here, and maybe work up a patch. > From the distribution point of view this appears to be "dead upstream" and > is a reason for package removal. Debian is about to do a "soft freeze" for > preparation for the next release whereby packages in the archive will need > bug support for 3 years. As a mere user of Debian who doesn't care for popcon, I find the "dead upstream" reason annoying. Sometimes software is just "done" and good :) New features generally leads to more bugs, which can penalize existing users. I've already lost "iprint" and "mp3gain" so just end up copying binaries from old installs, now. > The main thing I want to know is "what should I do about the release?" > I'm considering the following choices: > a) release 'mlmmj' as before, with myself as maintainer of the package. > b) orphan the package so that there is no listed maintainer, where the package > might be released with Debian 11 or might get dropped, depending on what > the Release Team decides about the package themselves > c) request removal of the package from the archive > > Choice "a)" only fits if someone in "upstream" is willing to try to fix bugs > that get reported. Are there others helping with this at present? I can help with critical bugfixes here or on the Debian BTS via email. Don't expect me to use JS or accept terms-of-service(*). I spent over a decade focused on fixing and preventing bugs in others' C89/C99 code; so I might still remember some things :> I also have some experience with Debian packaging from the early-2000s which may be out-of-date. > Right now I'm uncomfortable about this because the GitLab repo can't be > found from the mlmmj.org web page, and that repo seems to be where bugs are > reported and handled lately, as best I can tell. Is that correct? > > Side note: In terms of chances of bugs needing upstream help, looking at the > Debian "popularity contest" figures I see that the number of users reporting > having mlmmj loaded is low but slowly going /up/, which is good but not what > I expected to see. (Note: these "popcon" numbers are likely artificially > low, because not all machines are set to report popcon data to Debian.) > > https://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=mlmmj Interesting and good to know it's going up. I don't use popcon myself since I prefer to run as little software as necessary. > Choice "b)" seems the most reasonable to me under the circumstances, but > puts the package at risk of removal. This option does not preclude me from > continuing to help fix bugs on the package as a "non-maintainer", which is > what I would intend to do, for as long as I still use the package. > > I'd like to hear other's thoughts about this so we can discuss it some. > Thanks. "a)" seems to be the safest choice to prevent removal and perhaps get new users; especially if you keep using and maintaining it. Thanks again for your work on Debian and I'll be happy to help over plain-text email. (*) To be fair, GitLab's ToS was less horrible than GitHub's from what I recall... The major reason I continue using mlmmj and email is I can't stand JS, ToS, GUIs, and proprietary messaging systems.