On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 15:08:33 +0200 Elimar Riesebieter <riesebie@lxtec.de> wrote: > * Neil Williams [090426 13:50 +0100] > > On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 14:19:15 +0200 > > Elimar Riesebieter <riesebie@lxtec.de> wrote: > > > > > * Elimar Riesebieter [090417 19:04 +0200] > > > > > > > > Dear mentors, > > > > > > > > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version > > > > 3.7.0~beta20090329-1 of my package "ripit". > > > > > > Is there no one out here to upload this package? > > > > The RFS wasn't sufficiently interesting. > > > > http://people.debian.org/~codehelp/#lang > > > > Tell sponsors why they should care about the package - your initial > > RFS was bare, incomplete and just plain uninteresting. > > Hey, my package is an update. So what? No sponsor knows about every package already in Debian. The FAQ is clear that the RFS must contain everything the sponsor needs, an RFS that relies on looking up web links will likely be ignored. Your RFS didn't even list any web links to details about the package itself in Debian so it was no surprise that it got ignored. Your RFS was boring, so I stopped reading it and went back to doing more interesting stuff. If you think that is OK, then don't complain that nobody cares about your request for an upload. If you disagree, post a better RFS. Your ping message contained even less information and didn't fix any of the issues that led to the original RFS being ignored - what did you expect? (You're a tad lucky that you got a response at all, most such pings are silently ignored. Yes, that is pointing at you Rogério Brito, regarding ttf2pt1 (QA upload). If an RFS needs a ping, the chances are that the original RFS was unsatisfactory, uninteresting or incomplete. Compounding that error with a 1 line ping is ridiculous.) -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/
Attachment:
pgpZqVJPHW9Pb.pgp
Description: PGP signature