Re: Debian needs more buildds. It has offers. They aren't being accepted.
Stephen Frost <email@example.com> writes:
> * Nathanael Nerode (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
> > Stephen Frost wrote:
> > >It seems clear to me that the status pages aren't actually useful as a
> > >reference for others to see if there is a problem that may need to be
> > >addressed.
> > Nevertheless, they will be used as such if there is no better reference,
> > because there are people who need to see if there is a problem. For
> They shouldn't be, that's the point. People who are using them as such
> are *wrong* to be doing so, at least without any other information.
> There isn't enough information to draw any useful conclusions about
> there being a problem with the process.
But as NM I couldn't ask the DAM because he ignores me. My AM had no
idea what the DAM was waiting for so no help there. The webpage didn't
Where else was I supposed to go looking?
> > instance, how about a sponsor wondering what's keeping his sponsored
> > applicant from being accepted? Or someone whose package depends on a package
> > being maintained by an NM applicant?
> The sponsor should ask the applicant! The second question isn't even
> relevant to this- such situations aren't different for NMs vs. DDs, in
> either case sending an email to the maintainer would work, if there's
> need to.
Whats wrong with noting on the webpages if the applicant is missing?
Why should the sponsor try to contact him again and waste a month
waiting for a reply thats not going to come? (e.g. when the applicant
has been pinged already)
In most cases proper notes are added by the AM or by the
Frontdesk. They are doing a pretty good job there. In cases they
forget I think its not bad if someone notices and inquires.