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

Re: Improving the visibility of LowThresholdNMU



On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 07:24:21AM +0000, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> The LowThresholdNMU wiki page[0] lists maintainers (and packages) for
> which NMUs are welcomed.

  IMHO this should be the default for everyone without exception, and I
feel sorry we need such a page.

  I mean, there is two cases:
  1- there is a co-maintenance team, known to be reactive, then contact
     them on their list before, because the coordination of a team is
     likely to be more complicated, hence a "rogue" NMU isn't a
     brilliant idea.

  2- there is a bug open for 7+ days (if RC), or an important one that
     counts for this or that migration/update/whatever for say 10+ days
     without any answer from the Maintainer. Then just NMU.

  Migrations usually last way more than 10 days due to testing
transitions, so 7 to 10 days is not such a long time.


  OTOH my experience with NMUs is that people that complain because of a
NMU are in 95% of the cases (if not more) the people that have been the
more warned that a NMU could happen, and people that are the more likely
to "deserve" one, and those will never subscribe to a page like
LowThresholdNMU anyway.
-- 
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O                                                madcoder@debian.org
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org

Attachment: pgpLQngo_PTyb.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: