Re: Updated proposal for improving the FTP NEW process
Hi Chris,
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 02:44:32PM +0000, Chris Lamb wrote:
> > 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.
>
> In my experience, time/energy/focus is not as fungible or easily
> transferable as you imply.
I share your assumption that if we try to get a real random set of
packages checked instead of checking those who are ending up by random
reasons in new we will end up with less re-checked packages. However,
this does not give any good reason for keeping the habit to re-check
packages where a resulting binary package is not inside the package
pool. It somehow reminds me to those people who were asked: "Why are
you doing this?" and gave the answer: "Since we did so all the time."
We all know that ftpmasters have a lot of work and this thread is about
convincing ftpmaster to stop some work that does not belong to their
initial task which is *checking new source packages*. So far I've read
a single example in this thread that a developer was happy about the
check since a mistake was avoided. But this would have happened by a
random user via BTS as well.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: