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

Re: DM application for Adam Cécile (Le_Vert)

On Monday 4 February 2008 23:14, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> This is a recommended practice, not a mandatory one. And in practice,
> when processing a lot of NMUs, it is much easier to:
> 1. contact the maintainer through the BTS
> 2. immediately upload to DELAYED/n
> 3. if the maintainer answers, cancel/delay some more the upload
> Than to:
> 1. contact the maintainer through the BTS
> 2. wait an "appropriate" amount of time
> 3. upload without going through DELAYED
> The result is exactly the same, and, FWIW, during all the NMUs I sponsored
> to fix dash build failures, you were the only one to complain.

Although this may be technically very sound and yield the same result, I do 
agree that the signal sent by uploading to DELAYED/2 right away is quite a 
different one from the second scenario.

Not to discredit your very useful work, but I hardly see any reason why this 
bug needed to be fixed two days later already. Of all the choices of the 
delayed queue, 2 instead of 10 suggests some real urgency which I cannot find 
in this bug.

Uploading to the DELAYED/10 queue has the exact same effect for you (no need 
to come back to it) but allows for much more time, including a weekend, for 
the maintainer to address the issue themselves, and hence sends, in my view, 
a lot less "pushy" message to an active maintainer.

Or alternatively if there is a convincing reason to shorten the delay, 
indicate that reason rather than resorting to a purely procedural argument 
("it's allowed") like you did in the cited bug log.

Just to repeat that I find your work very useful, but I can also understand 
Aurélien's sentiment in this and I think that both interests can be satisfied 
here with just this little tweak in approach.


Reply to: