Re: Use of the BTS for managing sponsorship
* Raphael Hertzog
| Le Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 02:00:40PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen écrivait:
| > Most of my sponsorees haven't come from the CGI of yours, but from
| > this list, or #debian-devel.
| I know that. I observe myself that the CGI is most of the time out of
| touch with the reality. That's why I want to get rid of it.
| Still, if we created the CGI in the first place, it's because we wanted
| to keep a track of who's looking for a sponsor and so on.
| That's why I want us to switch to use the BTS.
This is usually called shotgun debugging. Try another solution until
you find one which fits. Obviously, this is not a good way to debug
| > the term. What I (and it seems a lot of other people) think is that
| > the current system works fine. At least, it works a lot better than
| > having to handle it through the BTS. IMO.
| You don't know if the current system works well enough (neither do I).
| Do you know if all sponsoree find a sponsor ?
I know that not all sponsorees find a sponsor. The BTS isn't a silver
bullet for fixing that. If a package is interesting above some
threshold, it will get sponsored, whether it be on -mentors or the
| What I see is that the CGI has a big list of people who haven't find a
| sponsor, and I don't know if they have asked here, or if they have one
| but forgot to update the entry and so on ... the BTS would keep track of
| what happens wrt each sponsored packages. I could find answers to
| questions like that.
Why do you think the BTS would be kept more up-to-date?
Tollef Fog Heen ,''`.
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' :