Re: Development standards for unstable
On 1/12/06, Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de> wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
> > [Florian Weimer]
> >> What about: stop threatening your fellow developers?
> >
> > Why is specifying the consequences of doing a bad job with maintaining
> > ones debian packages threatening?
>
> IMHO it isn't at all.
>
> > Personally I believe it is time we made clear and written down
> > explanations on what will happen to badly maintained packages, and
> > then implement it, to make sure the quality of the packages still in
> > Debian when this policy is implement is higher than the current level.
>
> In addition to the list of Anthony I might add:
> Require kind of a monthly status report of the maintainer. There must be a
> reason if an RC bug is open longer than a month. The maintainer should
> give reasons like "Need help", "Discussing with upstream", ...
> If the RC bug is two month old: "Sorry, got no help", "Upstream is ignorant",
> ...
> If a maintainer would not manage to respond to an RC bug for three months
> the package is obviousely not maintained and should be taken over by
> somebody else, IMHO.
I wish something like that applied to all bugs.
There are packages that have seen little updates for months/years with
lots of wishlist bugs.
Reply to: