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

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
> archive.

        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 <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>  
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: