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

Re: Development standards for unstable

On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 09:15:25PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> 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", ...).

I don't think it's impossible, and it would probably be an
improvement. The relevant point is that it isn't happening, and what
are you going to do about it?

If a scheme can only work for unimportant packages, it's probably not
worth the effort of implementing. So I'd say you have to start with
something that gets this part right.

Of course, this is just a reflection of the real problem here -
calibration. Exactly where were you planning to draw the line between
current packages that are well or poorly maintained?

Hell, if you can do *that*, there's ways to derive the metric in an
automated fashion.

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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: