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

Re: Best scheme for teams and Maintainer/Uploaders fields ?

Pierre Habouzit dijo [Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 11:58:49AM +0100]:
> > Uh? Why? Your maintainer field seems to address this issue. In our
> > scheme that's would be more a problem, but if the mailing list is
> > responsive it's enough. Think for example at the debian-release mailing
> > list: it's a list, but it's really responsive for all packages in the
> > archive. So IMO not being able to identify a single person is not
> > necessarily an indicator of unresponsiveness for a given package.
>   What he means is that when people are listed automatically as
> Maitnainer/Uploader, the fact that the package is well maintained may
> hide that a particular DD do nothing at all, and is in fact MIA.
>   Last-action of a DD is computed using many ways, uploads of package
> where he is in Maintainer/Uploader beeing among them, and it hides real
> MIAs from the mia tracking scripts, and that's bad, because it prevent
> good QA work, and generate more and more bitrot.

Umh... Then, I think the MIA-calculation ways are the broken ones, not
the team maintainership options. Developer activity should be done
checking either who signed the package, or at the very least, who's
name is reported on each of the changelog's entries - But basing it on
the Uploaders field is just asking for trouble. Team maintainership is
just a way to make MIA people hurt Debian _less_, not more! :)

Gunnar Wolf - gwolf@gwolf.org - (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244
PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23
Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973  F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: