Re: "Team uploads"
Raphael Hertzog <email@example.com> writes:
> The point of team upload is precisely so that you can update the package
> and not take responsibility for a package that you don't want to
> maintain in the long run.
> I was in many Uploaders field because lintian complain if you are not in
> Uploaders/Maintainer, yet I was there only for a single team upload for
> a perl or a python transition and using an NMU version would have been
> wrong because everything was properly done in the team VCS and there was
> no NMU to integrate for the next person working on the package.
> So I object to using NMU version for team uploads but I would like to
> have a mechanism for a team upload that doesn't lead to people adding
> themselves in Uploaders when they don't have a (real/long-term)
> commitment to the package.
> Then, the Maintainer/Uploader field would be again more accurate to know
> if we have people that care about the packages or not. So I see this
> change as good move to better detect that nobody cares about the
Yeah, this is where I'm at with it too. There still should be some humans
in Maintainer/Uploaders who are taking primary responsibility for the
package, but I think other team members should be able to do QA-style
fixes and transition uploads without using NMU versioning or add
themselves to Uploaders and hence imply that they're taking ongoing
responsibility for the package.
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>