Re: [mlmmj] distribution "dead upstream" discussion

Chris Knadle <[email protected]> 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.