Re: Allowing QA uploads for DMs (was: A lot of pending packages)
On Wednesday 16 June 2010, Tim Retout wrote:
> On 15 June 2010 21:59, Neil Williams <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Encouraging maintainers to invest their time in QA
> > makes more sense than adding more NEW packages to become the QA
> > workload of the future. Directing everyone at NEW is counter-productive
> > and encourages more horrible first-time packages.
> I agree entirely with this goal - I'm not yet certain that allowing
> unrestricted QA uploads by DMs will solve that problem, although I
> wouldn't be against testing it out.
> For starters, it could only really be allowed for DMs, not any old
> packager, I think. So would this produce results among "normal"
> My understanding was that some DMs are interested only in the packages
> they already maintain, otherwise they would be in the NM queue - so
> this subset would be less likely to bother with orphaned packages,
> surely? As for the others... if the act of allowing unrestricted QA
> uploads would spur them to make lots of fixes, why do we not see DDs
> doing this all the time?
There also some package maintainers such as I am, who simply do not have the
time to go through the NM queue.
And no, I won't even think about to adapt orphan packages, I already don't get
packages I'm interested in through mentors. Fortunately, Martin Pitt now wants
to help me to upload unionfs-fuse. I was already close to send a mail to this
list requesting to remove this package from Debian. IMHO, it is wrong to list
me as "Maintainer", if it impossible to maintain it...