more about Zookeeper

[Neil Williams]

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 22:07:30 -0300
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh at debian.org> wrote:

> On Sun, 12 Jun 2011, Ted Dunning wrote:
> > > Ted Dunning <ted.dunning at gmail.com> writes:
> > >> There has been a bit of talk about Apache Zookeeper recently by Thomas
> > >> Koch.  He has a bad opinion of Zookeeper and things it is "not good
> > >> enough for Debian".
> > >
> > > Could you please provide a reference?
> > 
> > How about this: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/06/msg00316.html
> 
> Ah, now I understand the whole deal better.

It's making some more sense to me too.

> I won't judge zookeeper, but it is pretty clear it is about to be
> orphaned, and that it needs a new team maintaining the Debian package if
> it is to remain in Debian.
> 
> It *is* too complex a package, it is not the kind of thing to foster on
> Debian QA.  It will have to be dropped if a new maintainer doesn't step up
> eventually.

As outlined in Henrique's previous post, the first thing which any new
maintainer team (and I do think it needs to be a team) must do is fix
the FTBFS bug. "Eventually" isn't good enough IMHO. I agree with
Henrique that leaving zookeeper in unstable would be OK IF there was an
active maintainer and #626020 was fixed. The package already claims to
be team maintained (pkg-java-maintainers) but nobody from that team has
spoken up here. (CC'd).

#626020 has already been open for a month. If it stays open another
month, I will file a bug for removal of zookeeper from testing. I
don't see any other option.

However, if there is no response from the existing team in the logs for
#626020 before that stage and no new team has shown signs of activity on that
bug report either, then I will seek removal from unstable because the
only real option would be to orphan the package as unmaintained, at
which point removal from unstable becomes inevitable.

Without active maintenance *and* a fix for #626020, there is already
sufficient justification to remove zookeeper from testing and unstable.

If #626020 is fixed by someone who is not willing to maintain it long
term, it's still less than ideal.

If #629856 is fixed without an active team appearing for zookeeper,
there is no reason to keep zookeeper around - even in unstable.

-- 


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-java-maintainers/attachments/20110613/f7cce9ba/attachment-0001.pgp>