[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Work-needing packages report for Jul 11, 2003

Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 09:47:39AM +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
>>Jamin W. Collins wrote:
>>No, it's perfectly sensible from the Debian's POV. (And from the
>>user's perspective, too, if she's interested in having a usable
>>The usual "two packages that are somewhat useful" applicant (as I'd be
>>myself, except that I don't bother at the moment), may be nice to have
>>to debian. But people getting the installer into shape are those that
>>Debian desperately wants and neeeds.

> And nothing stated here invalidates my statements in any way.  If
> sponsorship isn't viewed as any kind of a hinderance for normal
> applicants then there is no need for accelerated or special treatment
> for those working on select packages.

Oh, come on. The work on debian-installer is a much bigger coordinated effort
than maintaining - let's say libchipcard (one of my packages, presently the only
one) which has currently only one reverse dependency and only a handful of
dependencies. Compare this to the people that have been fast-tracked for d-i:
They need at least CVS access and things there change much more rapidly than for
most packages, so the ability to upload things independently is much more urgent.
I didn't state that explicitly, but if the only thing you need is sponsorship
for is an occasional package upload, that's much easier than sponsorship for
more involved tasks, d-i being one.



Attachment: pgpQY8Ytn6UIp.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: