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

Re: Long descriptions in RFS emails.

On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 08:37 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> Neil Williams <codehelp@debian.org> writes:
> > Just a note for everyone - I will now ignore any RFS that does not
> > include the long description for the package.
> > 
> > It doesn't matter how many times you "ping", without a long
> > description posted to *this* list, I will no longer waste time
> > either asking for one or reviewing your package and your RFS is
> > likely to be deleted without any further action.
> A good policy except that I'd recommend you respond to at least some
> of them to say *why* you think they're worth ignoring.

The debian-mentors FAQ does recommend more than the bare bones of the
RFS already. My sponsoring requirements are also linked from the
debian-mentors pages.

I have been responding to at least some of these inadequate RFS emails
in the past. I do not have the time to continue. I feel it is more
appropriate to simply ignore badly formed RFS emails en masse.

>  Many people
> posting to this list cannot be expected to know your policy since
> they're here for the first time.

I can and do expect that people using debian-mentors for the first time
follow the advice on the debian-mentors FAQ. The FAQ specifies that the
template is insufficient, yet I continue to see RFS emails that are no
better than the template.

Mentors has, IMHO, again become a dumping ground for inadequate packages
from lazy "maintainers", wasting sponsoring/reviewing time on packages
that are poorly prepared, sometimes not even lintian clean and where
"maintainers" do not appear to care about preparing an RFS beyond
"filling in some gaps in a template".

I am glad to work with those maintainers who stand out from such a dire
crowd and I will continue to do so.

Those who take some time over the preparation of packages and show some
level of effort in at least applying the principles of the FAQ deserve
my support and as I have limited time, I therefore choose to prioritise
my support to those who take the time to do the work.

Those who cannot be bothered to follow a link and who appear to be able
to little more than "join the dots" do not deserve my time. Sorry.


Neil Williams

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: