Re: [Backports-queue] Processing of qemu-kvm_0.11.1+dfsg-1~bpo50+1_amd64.changes
Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> * Andres Salomon <dilinger@queued.net> [2010-03-18 18:52:17 CET]:
>>>> Contacting the former uploader is on bpo's best practices but it's
>>>> on a strict rule of bpo, is it? Not that it's a bad idea, it's just
>>>> not always very practical.
>> I'd love to see this formalized as a strict rule. Say, a formal
>> requirement would be to email the uploader (using the email address
>> listed in the upload), and if there's no response within 30 days,
>> permission is implicitly granted to maintain the backport.
>
> I still wonder why this would be needed. Do we have it as strict rule
> for regular Debian uploads too? Actually I fail to see the big
> difference in this respect and why people should see it differently.
Well, depends on how you interpret things.
Backports are in my mind something quite similar to an NMU. The process
is not much different: fetch a package you don't maintain, change
something, build, test, upload and keep an eye on your inbox for bugs
that you may have introduced.
In that sense, 30 days is just ridiculous, since the developer's
reference suggests to wait ~10 days for NMUs not fixing RC or important
bugs and leaves room for even less on "trivial fixes". Most backports
are as trivial as it gets (simple rebuilds or minor build-dependency
fixes), and I can't see the need for a delay. OTOH, I'm on the
LowThresholdNMU list, so I may be biased here.
Regards,
Faidon
Reply to: