Re: More 5 november in the release schedule
On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 11:05:59AM +0100, Christian Seiler wrote:
> 30 days within the deep freeze should be plenty enough - and as I
> said: if the problem is more complicated, just talk to the release
> team _while the package is still in testing_.
Let's say I'm on holiday (or I get hit by a bus and end up in hospital,
or I get a major project at work which eats up all my time, or whatnot)
and I don't notice for a while that a package that I maintain gets an RC
bug. The automated machinery throws the package out before I have time
to work on the package again. Now what?
What if I did notice, but fixing the bug takes longer than the 15 days
(and I agree that we shouldn't release with that bug, so I agree that
the severity is correct)?
15 days is a pretty short time for irreversible changes in Debian, IMO.
If the policy for the upcoming release really is (and will remain) "once
you're out, you stay out, no exceptions", then have fun releasing Debian
without me. If the release team is willing to consider exceptions when
the automated machinery was jumping the gun a little, however, then
okay, I think it might be a good idea to try this out.
Being rigid about such policies is never a good thing, though.
> The goal of autoremovals is to provide an incentive for people
> to deal with problems in their packages _early_. My experience
> with the release team is that they are very willing to consider
> many different solutions if you talk to them early enough. They
> just don't want people coming along 4 months into the freeze and
> telling them "er, yeah, my package got removed 3 months ago, and
> I just didn't care about it until now, and during the entire
> freeze it didn't really receive much testing, but pretty please
> could it be included again?"
Well, yes, that makes sense -- but there's a major difference between "I
didn't care about my packages for 3 months" and "I didn't have time for
in-depth work for more than two weeks". The former marks an inactive
maintainer; The latter is not uncommon (at least for me).
--
< ron> I mean, the main *practical* problem with C++, is there's like a dozen
people in the world who think they really understand all of its rules,
and pretty much all of them are just lying to themselves too.
-- #debian-devel, OFTC, 2016-02-12
Reply to: