Re: Quality Assurance Group mini-policy

[ron@microtronics.com.au (Ron)]

I agree that the QA team does need a fairly free rein to actually be
able to do effective QA without chasing their tails, but orphaning
a package some certain time after a NMU bugfix does seem a tad kludgey
to be a successful general 'policy'.

There was a proposal a while back about utilising the BTS to keep
track of ITP postings..  Would it make sense then to extend that
theme to orphaning packages also..

The QA team could file 'intent to orphan' bugs against packages they
have reason to consider 'neglected'.  Packages with bugs of this
severity could then be automatically orphaned if they remain open too
long, or at some critical point.. (the announcement of a freeze comes to
mind but this may be a bit late in the development cycle..)

- Ron.