Re: Updated proposal for improving the FTP NEW process

[Steve Robbins <steve@sumost.ca>]

I think the suggestion of randomized spot checking is meant to replace - not add - to the present system of checking that penalizes uploads of existing source but new binaries.  So human resources should not be the issue. 

I would imagine that the packages currently being selected are not arbitrary -  they are weighted towards library code.  Is that fair to say?

On March 7, 2018 12:02:10 AM CST, Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org> wrote:

Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:

 I know for a fact that quite regularly licence checks on binNEW packages
 causes RC bugs to pop up.  I acknowledge it may be a burder for the ftp
 team, but that reason alone probably deserves to keep binNEW as it is.
 
 That would seem to justify some sort of randomized spot checks [..]

 Exactly.

Whilst it does seem a little odd, there is some merit the current system
where packages get essentially-arbitrary chosen for a cursory glance by a
member the FTP team.

The team is already rather time-limited so an expectation of DFSG-checks
of random packages already in the archive seems a little optimistic.

(Identifying various types of NEWness might still be marginally useful for
categorising new.html and similar interfaces, mind you.)


Regards,

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.