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

Re: RFS: ripit (updated package)

Hash: SHA1

Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 20:25, Neil Williams <codehelp@debian.org> wrote:
>> ? I have not changed the notes in order to prevent any sponsoring. I
>> have merely updated the notes as a direct result of issues that have
>> arisen when reviewing packages in order to ensure that I can provide   a
>> sensible review of the package prior to upload. It also reflects the
>> amount of work I do elsewhere and the impact that this has on the
>> amount of time that I can assign to areas with which I am not directly
>> familiar.
> Well, I think they are too many, too complex, and you put too much
expectation into new comers packages.
> They are supposed (well, sort of ;) ) to do some mistakes, and we are
here to correct them.
> What I always felt reading your guidelines is something only some
skilled DD can respect (so even some DD would fail).

I am new at deb packaging. I think Neil's guidelines [1] is good and
I am not an DD nor an DM. I have not start my NM process yet.
I am not an experienced programer. I only know a little C and shell

Neil's guidelines is clear, simple, and helps new maintainers to keep
their packages good.

I do know some Debian official packages maintained by some DDs would
fail to meet Neil's guidelines.
It is their problem, not Neil's.

It is good for new maintainers to read the checklist [2] on Debian wiki.

Kind regards
 Wen-Yen Chuang

[1] http://people.debian.org/~codehelp/#sponsor
[2] http://wiki.debian.org/SponsorChecklist
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


Reply to: