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

Re: "Team uploads"

On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 11:51:54AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> 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
> > package.
> 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.

+1, IANADD though.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: