On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 10:30:03AM -0430, Jose Miguel Parrella Romero wrote: > El 21/04/08 07:22, Jan Wagner escribi?: > | Just an annoying question. What's about all those DD who did upload > | packages with such bugs? Should we drop their upload rights? I > | think it's just a question of how frequently it happens related to > | the maintainance workload. > > I agree. We have to be careful when our interest for quality assurance > becomes plain bullying for our new contributors. Yes. As I tried to point out, I think we should be careful not to just add extra checks everywhere. But in this case the checks are good IMO. > Jos? Luis has now gone through most of the NM process -- Bas publicly > states that Jos? Luis can't handle uploads Just to be clear, I based it on his answers (see below). In summary, I see that to the several valid raised problems, he says "sorry, I should have done that differently". Now that's obviously way better than denying they are problems and starting a flamewar about it (as I have seen someone else do). But it also shows that he has made several mistakes in a relatively short timeframe. That's not a good moment to say "I know how to do things right", even if it is true. > but some people might make false assumptions from this statement, such > as "Debian doesn't work since a guy that doesn't even know what APT > stands for has gone through the NM process" (which is not the case, > but might happen :-) or even worse "faw sucks since he has passed a > useless maintainer", which again is not the case. I don't see a reason for anyone to come to such a conclusion, except if that's what they want to hear to start with. And in that case, no amount of facts can change their opinion, I think. ;-) > Debian has less skilled, less motivated, less active and more > problematic maintainers and developers; therefore I can't share > arguments such as "you do not deserve upload rights since your upload > broke my package" especially when we are used to have breakages in our > unstable branch, either by human errors or not. If "there are people doing worse who got in" is a valid argument, then the quality of Debian will go down all the time, and never go up again. > Furthermore, I believe that fixing breakages is a major part of our work > making free software distributable, so the problem might as well be > reduced to "am I too lazy to care for my package when a breakage occur > or should I just curse and rant about it?" -- I believe Jos? Luis, and > lots of our new contributors are making an effort on doing useful work > in our archive. I don't have personal experience with his work, but from this thread it certainly sounds like he is doing useful work, indeed. My point is that doing useful work and meaning well should not be enough to become a DM. Certain skills are needed as well. If someone breaks his packages a lot and then makes an effort to fix them, he is doing useful work and means well, but he isn't the sort of person to give unsupervised upload rights. On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 12:54:54PM -0430, Jose Luis Rivas Contreras wrote: > Bas Wijnen wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 08:43:03AM -0430, Jose Luis Rivas Contreras wrote: > >> Hi, I was traveling, I just got home so I'll answer your questions :) > > > > Given these answers (and questions), you should IMO not yet be a DM. > > While you seem to have the right attitude, I think you can use some > > guidance with your packages before they are uploaded. > > > > DM isn't meant for everyone who uploads packages, but only for those > > whose sponsors didn't need to change anything to the proposed > > packages (at least a few times, IMO). Also, if severe bugs are > > found after an upload, that indicates that the sponsor should have > > asked for a change. ;-) > > Well, the issue was breaking a package that depends too much in > xscreensaver, but only in parts of xscreensaver so the split of the > packages made this break and was solved updating dependencies, not a > big deal. Such an issue should indeed not be expected, but according to Sune this happened at least two times; the second time you should have known about the reverse dependency and coordinated the upload with them. > I doubt that any sponsor would catch an issue like this... I agree that the sponsor isn't to be blamed ;-), unless he sponsored both packages and knew about the problems with the first package. > > If you've proven for some time that you handle uploads and bugs > > according to Debian's standards, I'd be happy to see you as a DM. But > > with all these issues in the recent past, I think this is not the time. > > Sorry, I believe this went out of proportion, there was only one issue > not a bunch of them... Well, in <[🔎] 48089E5F.2030902@yahoo.es> you say three times that you are sorry and should have done things differently, about three different topics. I only saw this thread, so it may in fact be more subtle. But it seems that there were at least three recent mistakes. Thanks, Bas -- I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org). If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader. Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word. Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either. For more information, see http://pcbcn10.phys.rug.nl/e-mail.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature