Re: SDL packaging team revival

[Miriam Ruiz]

2011/11/19 Dominique Dumont <d...@debian.org>:
>
> Hello
>
> Most SDL packages in Debian are outdated, people are complaining in the BTS,
> and the team is mostly inactive.
>
> That's bad news for my project. What can I do ?
>
>   Well, it's Debian project, I just have to step up.
>
> Thanks to Sam Hocevar, I'm now admin on Debian Alioth SDL packaging
> project.
>
> So let's rebuild the team. If you'd like to help getting new SDL packages in
> Debian, now is the time to join. I don't have the bandwidth to update all SDL
> packages, but I will review packages from non DD team members.

Thanks a lot for stepping up to solve this issue. I don't have too
much spare time these days, but if there's anything that you might
need (like more sponsoring DDs, for example), you can count on me.

Greetings,
Miry

[Paul Wise]

What happened to the idea of folding the SDL team into the games team?

--
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

[Kartik Thakore]

Is there interest from the games team to push and work on SDL packages? Or
would it get lost in a larger sea of packages to maintain.
Additionally, I feel SDL is not necessarily only games related.

[Dominique Dumont]

Le Sunday 20 November 2011 00:41:40, Paul Wise a écrit :
> What happened to the idea of folding the SDL team into the games team?

Nothing. I first heard of this idea several months ago and nothing happened
since.

This idea is good but has some drawbacks:
- packaging lib and packaging games is sometwhat different
- users of SDL libs may not be only games (*)
- Since Game packaging members are focused on games, SDL libs packages
are more likely to become victim of bystander apathy [1]

Let's say folding SDL team is plan B. Let's see first if plan A (SDL team
revival) is working.

That said, Debian games team members are also welcome to join SDL packaging
team.

All the best

Dominique

(*) I will use SDL_perl, but it won't be for a game.
[1] http://book.personalmba.com/bystander-apathy/

--
http://config-model.wiki.sourceforge.net/ -o- http://search.cpan.org/~ddumont/
http://www.ohloh.net/accounts/ddumont -o- http://ddumont.wordpress.com/

[Dominique Dumont]

Hello

Most SDL packages in Debian are outdated, people are complaining in the BTS,
and the team is mostly inactive.

That's bad news for my project. What can I do ?

Well, it's Debian project, I just have to step up.

Thanks to Sam Hocevar, I'm now admin on Debian Alioth SDL packaging
project.

So let's rebuild the team. If you'd like to help getting new SDL packages in
Debian, now is the time to join. I don't have the bandwidth to update all SDL
packages, but I will review packages from non DD team members.

For more details on how to join, see this post:

http://ddumont.wordpress.com/2011/11/19/sdl-team-revival/

All the best

Dominique

[Dominique Dumont]

Le Saturday 19 November 2011 20:16:17, Miriam Ruiz a écrit :
> Thanks a lot for stepping up to solve this issue. I don't have too
> much spare time these days, but if there's anything that you might
> need (like more sponsoring DDs, for example), you can count on me.

Any kind of help is welcome. :-)

I'm just a beginner in the Alioth admin game, I could also use help there ;-)

[Jon Dowland]

On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 09:46:47AM +0100, Dominique Dumont wrote:
> Le Sunday 20 November 2011 00:41:40, Paul Wise a écrit :
> > What happened to the idea of folding the SDL team into the games
> > team?
>
> Nothing. I first heard of this idea several months ago and nothing
> happened since.

Not strictly true. Fabian and I spent a few hours working on
sdl-mixer, in particular: I got the package into git and started
rebasing patches on top of a new upstream version; Fabian reviewed all
the patches. I can't remember right now where that work is. I hope
anyone who cares builds on top of our work and it isn't wasted.

> This idea is good but has some drawbacks:
> - packaging lib and packaging games is sometwhat different

The games team already package libs.

> - users of SDL libs may not be only games (*)

I don't see the relevance here. What difference does the
Maintainer: field make to users?

> - Since Game packaging members are focused on games, SDL libs
> packages are more likely to become victim of bystander apathy [1]

Thoroughly disagree here.

The games team is an active team with an existing infrastructure/set
of conventions: active alioth team admins; mailing list conventions;
tools and infrastructure to monitor bugs and perform QA checks; wiki
pages etc.

Creating a new team means doing all of the above again from scratch.
It also means any contributor needs to put work in to subscribe to
a new set of lists; request admin on a new project; learn a whole new
set of conventions for VCS or whatever: a total pain.

Whilst it's true that not all SDL users (in a packaging sense) are
games, and not all games use SDL; certainly the vast majority in both
direction do. And having the SDL packages maintained by an active
team with the majority of participants having a vested interested in
their well being, and giving SDL bugs more eyeballs is a great thing
IMHO.

I'd encourage anyone with the time and motivation to work on SDL to
consider this avenue as I really believe it's the most sensible.

> Let's say folding SDL team is plan B. Let's see first if plan A (SDL
> team revival) is working.

If you really feel that's the best way, I wish you the best of luck.

> That said, Debian games team members are also welcome to join SDL
> packaging team.

Whilst I'm no longer in the games team, the burden/barrier of joining
a new team and learning a whole new set of conventions on how to do
stuff etc. as briefly detailed above is too high for me to bother, I'd
rather put that energy into useful work.


Thanks,

--
Jon Dowland

[Dominique Dumont]

Le Monday 28 November 2011 15:59:27, Jon Dowland a écrit :
> > - users of SDL libs may not be only games (*)
>
> I don't see the relevance here. What difference does the
> Maintainer: field make to users?

It's not about the field. IMO, it's more about the mindset of a packager when
he considers his users. I concede that's a minor point.

> > - Since Game packaging members are focused on games, SDL libs
> >
> > packages are more likely to become victim of bystander apathy [1]
>
> Thoroughly disagree here.

ok.

> The games team is an active team with an existing infrastructure/set
> of conventions: active alioth team admins; mailing list conventions;
> tools and infrastructure to monitor bugs and perform QA checks; wiki
> pages etc.

Agreed.

> Creating a new team means doing all of the above again from scratch.
> It also means any contributor needs to put work in to subscribe to
> a new set of lists; request admin on a new project; learn a whole new
> set of conventions for VCS or whatever: a total pain.

That's why I push for conventions which are shared by games teams (and debian-
perl team). Did I stray far from your practices ?

> Whilst it's true that not all SDL users (in a packaging sense) are
> games, and not all games use SDL; certainly the vast majority in both
> direction do. And having the SDL packages maintained by an active
> team with the majority of participants having a vested interested in
> their well being, and giving SDL bugs more eyeballs is a great thing
> IMHO.

In theory, you're right. In practice, SDL packages were not updated.

> I'd encourage anyone with the time and motivation to work on SDL to
> consider this avenue as I really believe it's the most sensible.

I'd encourage anyone to work where they're more comfortable. I've got no
problem if someone wants to take over a SDL lib package and maintain it within
game team provided it's properly communicated. What matters to me is that
packages are not left to rot and people time is not wasted.

> > Let's say folding SDL team is plan B. Let's see first if plan A (SDL
> > team revival) is working.
>
> If you really feel that's the best way, I wish you the best of luck.

Thanks.

> > That said, Debian games team members are also welcome to join SDL
> > packaging team.
>
> Whilst I'm no longer in the games team, the burden/barrier of joining
> a new team and learning a whole new set of conventions on how to do
> stuff etc. as briefly detailed above is too high for me to bother, I'd
> rather put that energy into useful work.

BTW, you were already part of SDL team when I joined. You still are.

All the best

Dominique