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

Re: Skills check for sponsored packages



Andrew Stribblehill <a.d.stribblehill@durham.ac.uk> writes:

> Should I apply the same standards of rigour to these packages that I
> do for my own sponsees' packages, namely, perfection ;)?

Yes.

> It doesn't seem like my place to step on sponsors' toes.

It is. You check the skills of the Applicant. If there are errors in
the package you ask the Applicant to fix it. Then look how fast/good he
is in that and decide what to do next.

> Maybe there's a solution I'm overlooking but neither of my
> alternatives look reasonable.

My solution is to ask for a package built without debhelper (every DD
should be able to do it). Either a new package or a rebuilt of the
existing one. And then check if everything is there (that includes a
md5sums, mostly forgotten :) ).
Ok, this is if the package is too easy or if
he just adopted it, but hey, only two Applicants until now with enough
complicated or enough (count) (mostly error-free) packages until now.
(if i remember that right).

<advertising>
http://goliathbbs.dnsalias.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/nm_templates/
</advertising>
:)

-- 
begin  OjE-ist-scheisse.txt
bye, Joerg                 Encrypted Mail preferred!
Registered Linux User #97793 @ http://counter.li.org
end

Attachment: pgpCuYZiFMzjW.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: