Re: Debian needs more buildds. It has offers. They aren't being accepted.
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> * Goswin von Brederlow (brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de) wrote:
> > Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> > > 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
> > show anything.
> >
> > Where else was I supposed to go looking?
>
> The front desk would be one place, at least. You had more information
> than was present on the web page anyway though, and did have discussions
> later with the front desk, etc, etc. You, for other reasons, are
> something of a special case as well. My point was that the information
> on the web page alone isn't enough to identify a problem in the system
> and isn't actually useful for anyone but the FD and maybe the AM. It's
> neat information for the rest of the world to be able to see, but the
> rest of the world shouldn't think that they can somehow identify a
> problem with the system just by reading the webpage.
>
> > > 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?
>
> Certainly nothing is *wrong* with it, but it's not required and would
> add to the time it takes for AMs to do their work *without any benefit*.
It saves the time the Frontdesk needs to look for problems too.
> > 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)
>
> Honestly I don't see this happening. What month is 'wasted' by the AM
> attempting to contact the NM? What about people who have packages
> sponsored who aren't in the NM queue, or havn't been assigned an AM yet?
> This isn't an argument, it's not even a point for discussion.
The example I ment was:
1. NM is maintainer of foo.
2. NM is MIA.
3. someone has a problem with foo
4. someone sees no activity for foo, got no reply to mail
db.debian.org doesn't have echelon information for the maintainer so
the next place would be nm.debian.org.
> > 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.
>
> If they've got some reason to then I don't have a problem with that, in
> fact, *that's exactly what I suggested*. I don't think it'd be
> productive for uninvolved people to ping AMs for such information just
> to satisfy their own curiousity.
>
> Stephen
As long as AM, DAM and Frontdesk don't mind getting one after over 6
Month of no update thats fine.
Since we all agree, lets get back to work.
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: