veyepar: Debian Science - umbrella for scientific packages or dustbin for scientific code?

Author(s):	Andreas Tille
Location	Rex
Date	aug Sun 06	Days Raw Files
Start	12:00	First Raw Start	error-in-template
Duration	00:45:00	Offset	None
End	12:45	Last Raw End
Chapters
Total cuts_time	None min.

https://debconf17.debconf.org/talks/10/
raw-playlist raw-mp4-playlist encoded-files-playlist mp4 svg png

assets release.pdf Debian_Science_umbrella_for_scientific_packages_or_dustbin_for_scientific_code.json
logs
Admin: episode episode list cut list raw files day marks day marks day image_files

State:

Locked:

clear this to unlock

Locked by:

user/process that locked.

Start:

initially scheduled time from master, adjusted to match reality

Duration:

length in hh:mm:ss

Name:

Video Title (shows in video search results)

Emails:

email(s) of the presenter(s)

Released:

has someone authorised pubication

Normalise:

Channelcopy:

m=mono, 01=copy left to right, 10=right to left, 00=ignore.

Thumbnail:

filename.png

Description:

markdown

The Debian Science mailing list was created in 2005 and in 2008 the Blends framework was implemented to turn some random discussion into a structurised team with dedicated coders and packages.  Later other existing packaging teams maintaining scientific software were merged and since about 2013 the Debian Science Blend is covering most of the scientific packages inside Debian which do not have any specific Blend team (like DebiChem, Debian Astro, Debian Gis and Debian Med).  It tries to serve as entry point for scientists with an interest to package some software for Debian or seeking help with some scientific software.  The original idea of the quite general Debian Science was that it could serve as an umbrella as long as there is not yet sufficient manpower inside Debian to be able to run an own Blend for a certain topic.  This has worked out for Debian Astro which is a pure offspring of Debian Science - so the concept has at least one example that it can work.

However, there are also things regularly criticised:  Debian Science does a bad job to pick up packages where Uploaders vanished from the team without notice and several packages are in a bad state.  Admittedly this is the case to some extend.  It is caused by the fact that scientists tend to move to different projects or institutions and do not find the time to sort out their code heritage.  While this is effect is neither new nor unknown inside Debian this kind team orphaned packages sometimes shades a bad light onto the team.  While there are some team members who are doing a great job in picking up such orphans forming kind of Debian Science internal QA team not all cases are covered.  At least the good news is that it is very easy to take over an orphaned package by team uploads or even adding an ID as Uploader.

The audience of the talk are all people interested in scientific software.  I try to present ideas how we could strengthen the "umbrella side" even more over the "dustbin side" by concentrating more dedicated  people for certain topics.  Ideas how to reach out further into scientific groups to gather more team members are welcome.

Comment:

production notes