[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Sponsor's responsibilities

Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> On 20000914T102042-0700, Rick Younie wrote:
>> Anyhow, ignore this specific example.  I just mean in the general
>> case.  Get it close or flog the package until it squeaks?
> Well, in the final analysis, it's the sponsor's neck on the line if
> something bad happens.  It's a matter of how much he trusts the sponsee.

Sponsee?  Tony made that one up didn't he?  I can see the
confusion in a couple years when the number of Debian maintainers
hits a few million.  "What's that language you're speaking?
Debian you say?" :-)

> Personally, I'd use the same standard I use on my own packages.


Maybe we're saying the same thing.  My own packages have bugs
despite my best efforts.

I think a point could be made for including a bogus bug in a
guy's first package so he can learn the changelog procedure for
closing it while he's still in close contact with his sponsor.
Although there's no real trick to it and the pattern match is
very robust.


Reply to: