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

Re: Lintian based autorejects

[ Adding -qa to Cc ]

On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 02:22:28AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > For future handling: If we are adding tags to the list that will hit
> > more than a few packages we will send a notice to the d-d-a list.
> I don't think it's appropriate for the ftp team to add any other checks
> without notifying the project, regardless of how many packages are currently
> affected.  Please make sure you notify the project of /any/ additional rules
> you apply at archive accept time.

ACK on this.

While I heartly welcome this addition, I see the centralization of the
tag decision process as potentially dangerous; not for "power" reasons,
but rather for the bad feelings (and related flamefests!) such changes
can leave behind and for the potential bottleneck risks (nowadays FTP
master is luckily and finally more stuffed than in the past, but
tomorrow who knows?).

So, I revamp a proposal I made in a corner of this thread:

  Let the QA team decide upon the non overridable lintian errors.

Rationale: the QA mailing list is considered to be a rather good venue
to discuss and reach consensus, also it is one of the places where
lintian maintainers discuss various issues, and (trivially) QA is the
supposed place where to enforce project-wide QA.
(Full disclosure: yes, I'm currently an active QA member.)

Of course this change proposal is not meant to force FTP masters to
implement support for that. If they agree on such change, it would be
more than reasonable for them to ask for a specific patch implementing
that technically.


Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..|  .  |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: