sponsored NMU's to be forbidden (Re: How can a non-DD fix broken packages?)
On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 09:48:06PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> IMHO we really should have a global NMU blacklist (no, never per-package.
> That way lies lameness) which we could ask the ctte to place maintainers in
> for a few months when someone does the NMU-and-forget routine and that NMU
> causes problems: screw up an NMU and don't clean up after yourself, get
> punished by not being able to screw up through NMUs again for a while.
> We should *also* have the pts auto-add anyone who does an NMU to receive all
> bug reports. If you NMU, you *are* responsible for it, and it is not nice
> to make it so easy for one to forget he NMUed something, after all.
You sure do have a point here. But that seems to apply to both DD's and
non-DD's. I still don't see why a sponsored NMU would be bad.
-- Bart Martens <email@example.com> Wed, 31 May 2006 07:20:01 +0200