Re: Task and Skills messages
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 10:01:12PM +0000, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Martin Pitt <martin@piware.de> [2004-03-15 20:42]:
> > IMHO the templates can be regarded as an inofficial standard; tests
> > should not be weaker than them;
>
> Oh, they can be slightly weaker. Joerg's templates are good starting
> point; it shouldn't be *much* less than that, but I have no problems
> when the ELF questions are removed (I do that myself).
>
> > however, I don't think that a little freedom on the AM's side hurts.
>
> Yes, Joerg's templates are basically an orientation, but you can
> certainly deviate from them.
> >
> > E.g. Martin Michlmayr said that he won't put my additional tasks
> > (package correction, RC bug fixing, writing actual manpage for a
> > program that does not already have one, and applicant-specific ones)
> > into the official templates; however, he appreciates them.
>
> I like them, and wish all AMs would ask their applicants to fix RC
> bugs because that's a practical test and actually helps Debian. But I
> felt they don't fit in well with the quite rigid templates... most AMs
> just use the template as it is, and I don't feel comfortable asking
> applicants to fix RC bugs just in a template... it should be done on a
> case per case basis.
>
> (Don't know if this was clear at all now...)
Oh, and our goal is of course to have a distribution so perfect that no
RC-bugs goes unfixed more than a day or two... One can always dream,
right?
Regards: David Weinehall
--
/) David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /) Northern lights wander (\
// Maintainer of the v2.0 kernel // Dance across the winter sky //
\) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Full colour fire (/
Reply to: