Re: List of (un)sponsored packages on Mentors (approximate)
On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 08:23:39PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 21:01:20 +0200
> "Ondrej Certik" <ondrej@certik.cz> wrote:
>
> > > The actual discussion came up when we talked about whether the
> > > current GR on non-DDs with upload permissions is good or bad for
> > > Debian. And we agreed that Debian lacks a lot of packages just
> > > because the poor package maintainer (tm) didn't find a sponsor in
> > > time.
> >
> > Yes, that is the most difficult part. I think it would also help, if
> > there was some official repository for unnoficial packages, so that I
> > (as non-DD) could just upload my package to mentors (which I can now)
> > and then just add the "deb" line (not just "deb-src") into
> > sources.list and could easily use all packages from mentors (at least
> > on i386). Because now everyone has it's own private repository, which
> > I find very unfortunate.
>
> The reason packages on mentors.debian.net are not available as binaries
> for apt, only as source, is because packages for sponsoring often
> contain errors and problems that need to be fixed after review by a
> sponsor. It would not be wise, IMHO, for mentors.debian.net to send out
> a message that unreviewed packages are suitable for installation on
> the normal Debian systems of ordinary users.
Exactly. And that's what happened when we included the binary packages
in the repository. Users complained to our support address about bad
packages. Not even to mention the internet traffic (that costs me
real-world money). Source packages hardly create any traffic. Good thing
our scripts throw away binary packages. :)
Christoph
--
Peer review means that you can feel better because someone else
missed the problem, too.
Reply to: