Mike O'Connor <firstname.lastname@example.org> (25/03/2009): > [...] we are having trouble keeping up with the NEW queue wihtout > doing all of the source checks of packages not in the queue as you > seem to be suggesting we should possibly be doing. Actually, that's not what I meant to suggest. :) I've been wondering for a while whether to add a binary package (a debug one) to one of mine. A possible question is: will an RC bug be opened against the current package if the NEW one gets REJECTED for missing licenses? If that's the case, fine. We're going to fix those horrible licensing issues we have in the archive as soon as a binary package is added. But that can also mean one will refrain from adding binary packages because one is lazy/doesn't have time to check licenses etc. If that's not the case, one might be tempted to try and sneak a new binary package through NEW, without worrying about the consequences (a possible RC bug). And since I'm all for full disclosure, try the following and guess why there's no blender-dbg package yet: $ apt-get source blender && ls -d blender-*/extern/*/ (To be discharge, I'm already fighthing against embedded code copies and with time, things are getting better, but I'm not done yet.) To sum up: that was a real question, I didn't mean to point fingers. Mraw, KiBi.
Description: Digital signature