On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 08:25:22AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 22:28:25 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow
> <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de> wrote:
> >I think ftp-master already has a more complex prioritizing than
> >that. Adding a new kernel images deb tends to be real fast (with
> >exceptions), adding a new deb to old source reasonable fast and
> >completly new source can take forever if questionable (e.g. mplyer).
>
> And, as usual, no communication with the outside takes place. Which is
> a real mess.
<hijack mode="thread"/>
On the flip side, whatever was broken with the NM queue in the past (and
people have a wide variety of opinions on what that might have been), it
appears to have started moving relatively steadily, coincidental with the
addition of another DAM.
Perhaps that really is coincidence, or perhaps it is causal; maybe there
are things we can't see going on inside[1], but whatever changed, it
appears to have had a positive, and so far consistant, effect.
So, three cheers for... uhm... whatever fixed it.
[1] Which is a separate rant, and frankly, I think Debian needs to be
clear about what we really mean by "We won't hide probles" in our Social
Contract - it talks specifically about our bug database, but if that's
what we mean by "problems", we should say "We won't hide bugs in software
we maintain". The usage of "problems" implies a far broader expectation
of things like transparent process, especially when a process appears to
be hung or broken, and we don't seem to even be able to decide, amongst
ourselves, which we mean - perhaps because different camps want each to
be true. But I hesitate to even open the can of worms of "another Social
Contract revision" so soon. Still, people should think about what they
believe this means.
--
Joel Aelwyn <fenton@debian.org> ,''`.
: :' :
`. `'
`-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature