Re: Legal advice regarding the NEW queue
On 2022-02-05 16:07, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> Just because someone else can't be bothered to do licence review checking
> doesn't mean that Debian shouldn't.
I wasn't advocating against license review checking in general, though.
We expect and trust all contributors to do that.
The question as I see it is: why do we need another party (ftp-master)
to verify that first review. It's a major bottleneck to everyone, a huge
burden to the ftp-master team.
As far as I can recall, the argument has always been that is necessary
for liability reasons. My point is that I don't recall every seeing such
a liability materialize with other projects, so perhaps our assumptions
about the magnitude of this issue are wrong. (Or I'm just ignorant about
such cases.)
> I'd much rather that packages were removed in NEW than that they got
> installed in unstable and we then had to tell people that they had
> gone.
> There's a huge amount of software that's undistributable: Debian's good faith
> attempt to review this is one of the crucial arguments I have with $DAYJOB
> about the benefits of a curated distribution, however fallible we may be.
Fair enough.
Reply to: