Re: "Team uploads"
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 09:27:53AM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
> 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:
>>> 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.
>> 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.
Just like NMUs: just because a package had a small number of NMUs does
not mean it needs special QA attention. But a pattern of only NMUs is
a tag for QA attention. As Paul means them (I'm in the team, but for
this particular package I do work on it once, but don't take charge
for any future work), team uploads have the same characteristic: if
there are only team uploads, it is an indicator that nobody within the
team feels responsible for the package. Yes, there can be corner
cases where this is not the case.
--
Lionel
Reply to: