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

Re: Not every package should enter Debian (was: Re: Who cares about NEW when there are bigger issues? (was Re: Is NEW processing on hold? (was: Question for candidate Towns)))

On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 07:42:58PM +0100, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
> IMHO, Debian has a serious double-problem here and needs to attack it.  
> ftp-masters should, as I understand the role, be a purely administrative 
> function: keep the archive running.  No policy decisions should be made by 
> ftp-masters.
> In that light, fully automatic NEW processing will not hurt at all (I agree 
> that a delay of a few days is sensible to give us time to react to the 
> worst problem cases.)

Unfortunately reality isn't so simple. In practice, the ftp-masters
have also become the review point for new packages. We *need* new
packages reviewing just to filter out some of the worst of the stupid
from the archive; frankly we need more than just new packages
reviewing. However, splitting that task out would probably be a good

> Ok, that's the easy technical bit that gets rid of manual NEW processing 
> alltogether.  Now, the second question:  How do we tell what should be 
> included in Debian and what not?
> There is no obvious answer.  So the project has to decide on some arbitrary 
> standards - but I think it has been proven that decisions on a case by case 
> basis does not work - the pr0n debate comes up regularly, and as soon as 
> that's started somebody drags religion and politics into it and we have a 
> 300-mails thread.

Well, that's mostly because religion and politics are the only reasons
people ever object to 'pr0n' in the first place :P

But since those would exclude so much of the archive already, they
really can't be allowed as criteria.

  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: