Re: RFS or not - Was: Re: mentors review subject
On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 04:02:54AM +0100, Phil Wyett wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The data now being added, be it on a subject line or via bts control all
> require that a submission to mentors file an RFS. We have many that state
> they do not require a sponsor or not file an RFS. This makes processing
> difficult and time intensive.
>
> Should we require all submissions to mentors file an RFS?
>
> Please discuss. :-)
IMHO The existing documentation advocates already on using RFS bugs:
https://mentors.debian.net/sponsors/rfs-howto/
"In general, sponsorship requests should be handled through the Debian
Bug Tracking System."
https://mentors.debian.net/intro-maintainers/
"You will be shown a RFS (request-for-sponsorship) template that you
should send out as a bug report filed against the sponsorship-requests
pseudo-package to draw attention to your package."
There are corner cases (e.g sponsoree has already a sponsor) where an
RFS is not needed, but as the rfs-howto says, generally it should be
done as documented, and that is using RFS bugs.
Have you experience cases where people do not file RFS bugs but should
have? (/me only looking for RFS bugs, so I don't have that data.)
--
tobi
Reply to: