Re: Is Sid for broken stuff? Is it too much to ask for testing the packages?
On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 03:28:41AM +0100, Marek Habersack wrote:
> On another note - I expect the postgres maintainer to be an especially
> cautious and responsible person, because the package he maintains is
> depended upon by dozens of other packages and any failure to test new
> functionality of the packaging scripts or the upstream code might cause a
> chain reaction resulting in a lot of work for other developers
Yes I agree, back then when I was the maintainer of Lilo I realy where very
careful about not breaking anybodies boot sequence. This is basically the
reason why I could not maintain the package anymore. Implementing the new
feature requests was too much work, considering the extended care I put into
that. And of course I still had situations which did not work well, because
lilo is one of those packages which is very messy in terms of dependencies
(if you consider the state of the mbr).
For Debian we currently do not have a formal way of ensuring critical
packages in hands which do not do too much wrong. There are only two social
points which work quite well:
a) responsible base system maintainers wont give their packages away to
people they dont trust
b) if a package annoys too much users/developers it is getting harsh critics
(remebered back when perl was one of those candidates?).
Actually I think there are not much packages which where "forced" away (at
least I know none which was decided by RM or DPL), so this is a good sign
and perhapos an Indication that we do not need a more formal way to punish
DDs.
Greetings
Bernd
--
(OO) -- Bernd_Eckenfels@Wendelinusstrasse39.76646Bruchsal.de --
( .. ) ecki@{inka.de,linux.de,debian.org} http://home.pages.de/~eckes/
o--o *plush* 2048/93600EFD eckes@irc +497257930613 BE5-RIPE
(O____O) When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl!
Reply to: