From: otto@debian.org 
  
 Hi, 
  
 On Fri, 22 Aug 2025 at 14:33, Theodore Tso  wrote: 
 > On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 01:15:54PM -0700, Otto Kek€€l€€inen wrote: 
 > > Maybe we can have more of this, but note that we already have at least 
 > > 7 avenues for the information about an open MR can reach the 
 > > maintainer: https://wiki2025.debian.org/wiki/Salsa. I think this 
 > > ultimately boils down to people who dislike Salsa vs others. Seeing 
 > > that you host none of your packages on Salsa I am not surprised you 
 > > are not keen on the topic of looking at MRs, and I respect that, but 
 > > for the rest of the crowd, I still want to remind checking for 
 > > potential open MRs. 
 > 
 > Actually, I do have a repo on Salsa: 
 > 
 >     https://salsa.debian.org/tytso/e2fsprogs 
  
 Sorry, let me rephrase: none of your packages' Vcs-Git field point to 
 Salsa as the official git hosting. For e2fsprogs it is 
 https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/ext2/e2fsprogs.git 
 The Vcs-Git field is relevant in the context of discussing reviewing 
 MRs, as contributors would submit MRs on Salsa only if the package 
 Vcs-Git field advertises Salsa. 
  
 > It's rather deliberlately not under the debian hierarchy because I do 
 > *not* believe in letting random people submit changes to the repo, and 
 > unlike those who were apparently taken by surprise, I had taken a very 
 > careful look and then said, yeah.... oh, HELL, no. 
  
 I absolutely agree. I don't think that people should be committing 
 directly or uploading packages that have a clear maintainer. In those 
 cases it is much better to submit patches or MRs and let the 
 maintainer decide what gets into the next upload. But the discussion 
 about salsa.debian.org/debian/ namespace is a separate matter, I'll 
 try to stick to the use and review Merge Requests in this thread that 
 is already very long. 
  
 > > Just to clarify, you don't think it is good to have a culture in 
 > > Debian that maintainers tend to check for open Merge Requests? The 
 > > rest of the paragraph was about something else. 
 > 
 > It's the culture where people receive nag e-mails which is what I 
 > object to. 
  
 Roger that, understood. In my defense, I sent the request to review 
 MRs in January and again in August intentionally many months later, as 
 frequent emails might come off as nagging. Seems that it still came 
 off as nagging. Sorry for that. 
  
 If I do send someday again an email about my concerns about too many 
 MRs being ignored and it harming Debian, I will try to avoid the style 
 of addressing all uploaders as I did now, and instead just list cases 
 where it happened, so the message is specific and evidence-based. 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)