Re: Lintian based autorejects
On Sun, Nov 01 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 07:54:52PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Well, just like the release team apparently has the right to
>> arbitrarily overrule policy and decide when serious bugs are not
>> serious -- as opposed to not RC -- yup.
>> I do think that the ftp team decides what gets into the
>> archive. They do this however they choose -- and I respect that decision.
>> Just like the release team decides what gets ihnto the
>> release. By whatever means they chose.
> Where the release team policy on RC bugs has diverged from Policy, it has
> been to *relax* enforcement of Policy requirements on packages already in
> the archive, and not remove packages from testing for these bugs. The
Which arguably makes the release buggier. I am not sure that is
a good thing. But then, I am not in charge of releases, so what I
think carries no weight, neh?
> release team does not obligate anyone to *not* fix such bugs in their
> packages; it does not *prohibit* developers from doing NMUs to fix
> those bugs. It's within the power of any developer to decide that a
> bug is important enough to them that they'll fix it themselves before
> release, you don't need the release team's blessing to do so - unlike
> trying to get packages past the ftp team's new rules and into the
What you have been objecting to in my bug filing is that I let
the ftp-masters decide what severity the bugs are at, just like let the
release team decide when the bugs are not serious (as opposed to doing
squeeze-ignore's). If you think one is wrong, the other is as well.
If the teams in chage of the release/archive do not change the
bug severities, I'll be happy to only file bugs at the severity levels
as set in policy and on bugs.debian.org.
> This is a difference between imposing new rules, and not forcing maintainers
> to comply with rules.
>> >> We knew this decision by the ftp team was coming for a while, and will
>> >> require checking against our other documents and probably changes to the
>> >> severity of various rules.
>> > And I objected before when this was first proposed that the ftp team
>> > should not be auto-rejecting from the archive for any issues that are
>> > not violations of Policy "must" requirements.
>> By the same token, the release team should not be accepting
>> packages intot he release that ciolate the MUST requirements, neh? Or
>> is the release team more equal than the ftp team?
> Only you would think that this is "the same token".
Both cases reset severities from the defaults for bugs related
to policy violations.
Cunning and deceit will every time serve a man better than
force. Niccolo Machiavelli
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C