Re: Development standards for unstable
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, Andrew Suffield wrote:
Well it's nice in theory. The problem is that you have to set the
threshold high enough to exempt glibc and dpkg, and when you do that,
I have not yet found a metric that complains about any other packages
(I've tried two or three times to invent one).
Sure, you could just manually exclude those few big offenders, but if
you're going to do that then what's the point?
I tried to mention briefly that this will not work in any case and
you just nitpicked these ones. On the other hand I can not really
believe that it is impossible to touch glibc and dpkg bugs with some
kind of status ("I'm working on it", "Help would be welcome in this
particular task", ...).
The problem is that every honor (to be a DD) is also commitment
(to care for the things that make you a DD). If you are not able
to fix things you have the responsibility to tell your users why -
at least this is my point of view in maintainership.
So for simplicity lets test the measure I suggested above for
packages with priority extra, right?