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

Re: Bits from the RM

Anthony Towns wrote:
> Fallback plans are important though, and in this case if we're not able
> to get in a position where maintainers are able to keep control of their
> RC bug count (which is to say, keep it at zero), we'll have to consider
> more drastic measures. An obvious one is to transfer packages that aren't
> being maintained at an acceptable level to new maintainers, whether the
> existing maintainer likes it or not. Some simple measures for this are
> things like "has this package had any RC bug open for more than a month or
> two", or "has this package had an RC bug open for more than a week or so
> without any response". Even if you ignore all of the preceeding message,
> you might like to ensure that those two criteria never apply to you.

Would it be a silly idea to consider having something official in policy (or 
somewhere) outlining a minimal set of QA standards that every debian 
developer agrees to abide by (in the future as a standard part of the NM 
process), with the up-front understanding that some kind of intervention 
process (which should obviously have built-in flexibility, but should be able 
to ultimately, and as a last resort, result in loss of packages and/or 
developer status) can/will be entered into otherwise? A few fair, open, clear 
standards, a level playing field, all very sensible, no surprises for anyone.

Stephen M. Gava <smig@users.sourceforge.net>

Reply to: