Andreas Barth wrote: > * Thomas Viehmann (tv@beamnet.de) [030705 23:50]: > >>So why is the recommendation against skipping the ITP to aviod problems in >>ftpmaster review "not right"? > A (strong) recommendation for doing ITPs right is right and usefull. > But - all foreseeable problems should be handeled at ITP-time, and > that's not the case. So the recommendation is right, but it doesn't > solve the problem Marc spoke of. I doubt that an eicar-installer ITP would have survived the scrutiny of devel. So it may not solve the general problem Marc about but it solves a very good share of it, most likely *including* the very specific instance he had problems with. If you can't come up with a case where the ITP review was positive and ftpmaster rejected the package in itself with a unforseeable reason (regarding a problem that cannot be fixed), I fail to see any merit in your argument. There's no point in establishing VIP review for people who are think they are too important for undergoing peer review. *Look* at #198311 and search for debian-devel and then ask yourself why Marc thinks that -devel should only be used as a forum to discredit ftpmasters work, and not as a place where ITPs should be reviewed. Cheers T.
Attachment:
pgptOCG_ukNyr.pgp
Description: PGP signature