Re: Time of a package to be processed by FTP-masters
Thanks all for your informative and quick replies. You've covered all bases
so I don't have any questions left, just one comment:
On Wednesday 27 October 2010 16:04:19 Charles Plessy wrote:
> Although a modest help, you may try to review some packages by yourself
> when a public copy is available, for instance on mendors.d.n or a VCS.
> The maintainers will probalby have enough time to upload a corrected
> update (this does not move the package back in the queue), hence saving
> some time from the people who will do the final inspection, and
> shortening the waiting time for your own package.
> On the following wiki page, here is a workflow that I have proposed some
> time ago. The goal is to trigger an chain reaction of package reviews:
> Have a nice day,
I've been hanging around in this list for a while, I think that I only
reviewed a package once (and replied to one question from your about the
correct way to test man pages :) ). But most of the time it's because the
mails posted are RFS, I don't have powers to upload them, and the developer
uploading them possess much more knowledge than me about packaging
questions, specially the tricky ones.
I'm trying to help Debian in general by adopting packages that are in my
field of interest and are effectively abandoned by their maintainers -- so I
update the upstream code (sometimes the package in debian is more than 3
years old), talk with upstream to solve issues and incorporate patches,
quell lintian complaints, put new package formats and things like missing
watch files, close a few bug reports, etc. And then I poke Ubuntu folks to
update from Debian.
So I've never added new packages to the repository despite what my initial
mail could suggest, I'm in fact adopting packages long abandoned, but which
need to enter the new queue for a variety of reasons (e.g. the package being
named according to a SONAME version).
The point being: adopting all the packages that I [co]maintain is already a
quite comprehensive, careful and tiresome revision ;)
The copyright peer-review sounds like an useful thing to do, though -- I'll
look into it when I have some time available.
Cheers, and thanks again!
Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <firstname.lastname@example.org>