On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 10:28:25PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > Our NEW queue is quite big and time needed to get package into unstable is
> > rather long. Nothing wrong with that for me, I know that ftp-masters are
> > busy and that approving these packages is very important and responsible
> > task.
> >
> > But there are two kind of packages in NEW queue.
> >
> > "Totally" new packages and old one that only incorporate new binary
> > package(s). These old packages has already source package in archive.
> >
> > I think the latter should be handled first, and then if ftp-master has
> > some spare time he/she could handle totally new packages.
>
> I think ftp-master already has a more complex prioritizing than
> that. Adding a new kernel images deb tends to be real fast (with
> exceptions), adding a new deb to old source reasonable fast and
> completly new source can take forever if questionable (e.g. mplyer).
Is he really got _any_ prority? Sure packages like mplayer are in NEW queue
for very long time, but seems that rest of packages is handled without any
priority and fact that package had already source in the archive doesn't
matter.
At least that's something what I think after tracking
http://developer.skolelinux.no/~pere/debian-NEW.html
Some packages are being hold (probably forever), but rest seems to be
approved in the order they appeared in NEW queue.
> > Any comments on that?
>
> Why is manual intervention needed at all?
>
> On a recent discussion about this on irc several things were said that
> have to be done for NEW packages, e.g. inform some U.S. government
> agency about the new deb, add an override entry into the db. The only
> thing that wasn't easily scriptable was:
>
> ftp-master might reject the new package name
>
> Someone said ftp-master might want to check the source for the NEW deb
> but that would apply to any source upload just as well IMHO. Debian
> already trusts DDs to not mess up existing debs so it should be simple
> to trust them not to mess up when splitting debs or adding more to an
> existing source.
>
> Overall, in my eyes, the question becomes: Does Debian trust DDs not
> to add debs with silly names to existing sources?
Who can we trust if not DDs?
> Why not automate the NEW queue for packages with prior source versions
> in the archive? Worst case ftp-master has to remove a deb with silly
> name from archive and kick the DD for it.
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong.
I think you're right. There is always way to remove wrong packages, and
developer which uploaded it could be warned if that case.
It's still better than waiting for approval for a month, like it is already.
regards
fEnIo
--
_ Bartosz Fenski | mailto:fenio@debian.org | pgp:0x13fefc40 | IRC:fEnIo
_|_|_ 32-050 Skawina - Glowackiego 3/15 - w. malopolskie - Polska
(0 0) phone:+48602383548 | proud Debian maintainer and user
ooO--(_)--Ooo http://skawina.eu.org | JID:fenio@jabber.org | RLU:172001
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature