Re: [RFS] q2-types 2020.11.0-1
Hi Étienne,
On 02.12.20 13:40, Étienne Mollier wrote:
> Hi Steffen, Hi Andreas,
>
> Andreas Tille, on 2020-12-02 09:27:51 +0100:
>> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 12:56:36AM +0100, Steffen Möller wrote:
>>
>>> Are you aware of
>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tApLhVqxRZ2VOuMH_aPUgFENQJfbLlB_PFH_Ah_q7hM/edit#gid=1986383821
>>>
>>> ?
>>>
>>> I suggest you put your name next to whatever you are about to work on,
>> I admit I'm very sloppy with this and also fail to check whether someone
>> has put some name next to it. I think this is sensible for some long
>> term work on new packages. However, the time to maintain those entries
>> for some routine-update or so is to much for me. If someone is working
>> on some bug its probably better to respond to the bug report that there
>> is some work in progress to avoid racing conditions.
> I was not well aware of the spreadsheet; I was just vaguely
> aware something of the like was deployed at least to synchronise
> on newer packaging targets. I also have difficulties to parse
> said document; I'm not sure where to look at names. All in all,
> I tend to agree with Andreas. I think per Debian Med policy, we
> follow the debian-med-packaging thread of emails, so pinging BTS
> entries might makes sense for synchronizing Debian related work.
This is beyond policy :) If not helpful then by all means don't use it.
I rarely use the BTS beyond ITPs, admittedly. Should change that. Yes.
To me, this excel sheet introduces context to the packages and the
packaging. That is something the BTS is not designed to do. That sheet
is not ideal, admittedly, but I find it already helpful for my own
packaging, inviting (?) and informative. I typically reserve a tab in my
browser for it ;)
The name or a tag like "RFS" I typically place in the "Difficulty to
Package"-column.
Best,
Steffen
Reply to: