On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 12:52:48PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Because:
>
> * Discussions about the RC bugs can be more effectively dealt with
> using our existing discussion mechanisms, including primarily the
> Debian BTS. Compared to REJECT mails:
> - Discussions in the BTS are more transparent
> - Discussions in the BTS are better organised
> - Discussions in the BTS can have wider participation
> - Discussions in the BTS are better archived
> - Discussions in the BTS have better metadata
>
> * Publishing a work-in-progress in the Debian archive enables more
> people to more easily help improve and fix it.
>
> * Once a package is accepted metadata about it, and parts of it, are
> automatically published by a variety of Debian services, making it
> much easier to work with - for example, one can see who the
> maintainer is and what its issues are.
>
> * ftpmasters are already far too overloaded looking for problems like
> unredistributability, dfsg-nonfreeness, malformed packages,
> breakages of the archive, etc.
thanks! nice summary.
> * It is not ftpmasters' role to determine whether a package is
> RC-buggy; that task is for the Release Team.
point taken as well.
still I think we should only stuff in unstable which is suited for
testing. So while you have convinced me that it's good to have those
packages in Debian I now think that experimental would be a fine place
for those, but not unstable.
--
cheers,
Holger
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature