On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 09:23:32AM +1100, An?bal Monsalve Salazar wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 07:11:03PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> >On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 09:02:47AM +0100, Marco Massari Calderone wrote:
> >>i requested a sponsor in the correct page....now, to know if someone
> >What correct page?
> He's listed at . The debian page at  has a note at the end with a
> link to .
>  http://www.internatif.org/bortzmeyer/debian/sponsor/
Quick hand check. Of all people willing to sponsor others, who actually
checks that page regularly to find people to sponsor?
That list is huge, and has no indication of freshness or relevance. I know
at least three people on that list who have found sponsors (in at least one
case, me) for their packages.
A sponsorship coordination page is nice, but it needs to be better than that
one. Sorry to Raphael and Stephane, but I don't think it's doing it's job.
Wasn't there previous discussion on using the BTS for tracking sponsorship
requests and such? Perhaps we should give that a crack - virtual package,
say "sponsor" or "wnpp-sponsor" (don't want to put these onto wnpp itself,
since it's got enough crap already), wishlist bugs for new applications, and
higher severity bugs for NMU and bugfix sponsorship requests (perhaps equal
to the severity of the highest bug fixed <g>). The bug gets closed in the
changelog (Sponsored by <foo>. Closes: #nnnnn.) If you need a new sponsor,
you file another bug. Rolling uploads with your existing sponsor would be
Any thoughts? Do I qualify for an "I abused the BTS and all I got was this
- From: Marco Massari Calderone <MassariC@CS.UniBO.IT>
- Re: sponsors?
- From: Matthew Palmer <email@example.com>
- Re: sponsors?
- From: Aníbal Monsalve Salazar <A.Monsalve.Salazar@IEEE.org>