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

Re: "Team uploads"

On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 08:18:33AM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 11:52:54AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> > In Debian we have several teams working on maintaining large numbers
> > of packages (pkg-games, pkg-perl, pkg-gnome for example). I
> > proposed[1] to silence the lintian NMU warnings in the case of "team
> > uploads"; where the person doing the upload is a member of the team
> > in Maintainers but is not present in Uploaders. Does anyone think
> > this concept of "team uploads" has merit?
> It is a useful concept, but I would like to consider them as "special
> case NMUs" rather than "special case MUs".
>  - NMU version number
>  - first changelog line contains "TU" / "team upload" / "team NMU" /
>    ...
>  - no need to put patch in bug
>  - no need for NMU delay
>  - no need to upload to delayed queue
> My reasoning is that a package that has had only "team uploads" for
> three years is a package where effectively no human is taking charge
> for maintaining it, just as a package that has had only NMU uploads in
> three years; I'd like QA / potential adopters to see that in the
> sequence of version numbers as they do now.

I don't understand; what is the problem with team uploads?  Sure, there
can be problems in inactive teams, but just because some packages had
team uploads doesn't mean they need special QA attention.

Besides, I think the Gnome team still puts all team members into
Uploaders via some debian/control pre-processing, maybe for the above

Getting rid of debian/control.in (unless needed otherwise) due to better
team maintership handling might be good thing.


Reply to: