Re: DM and pkg-perl (alternative proposal)

[Niko Tyni <ntyni@iki.fi>]

On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 12:11:04PM +0000, Damyan Ivanov wrote:

> DM prepares new (upstream/debian) version of the package and wants it
> uploaded. That DM is also confident in working with the package and
> wants to be able to upload it in the future. She has to do three things:
>  * add herself to Uploaders
>  * add XS-DM-Upload-Allowed: yes
>  * add a note to the changelog (in such a manner that it can't be missed
>    by the sponsor) warning of the changes.
> 
> Next, the sponsoring DD decides and either
>  a) removes the note, cleans Uploaders and uploads the package
>  b) denies the request, removes the note, undoes
>     upload-permission-giving changes (Uploaders and/or
>     XS-DM-Upload-Allowed), runs 'dch -r' and uploads as before

This is much better, and I'm fine with it. 

I think the DM could clean the Uploader list herself, so the sponsor 
could just verify or revert this. 

I'm also unsure if it's really necessary to remove the note.
Isn't just a regular entry in the changelog enough? The sponsor
is supposed to check the package thoroughly in any case.

Something like

 * Add the XS-DM-Upload-Allowed field.
 * Add myself to Uploaders.
 * Remove non-DD uploaders from the Uploaders list.

is not very easy to miss, after all.

> Note that "sponsoring DD" can technically be fullfilled by a DM who is
> already allowed to upload the package. I think this needs at least a
> public request to debian-perl before taking place.

It's probably enough to just specify that only DDs may sponsor uploads
changing the Uploaders field.

Is there any sense in the 'official' pkg-perl DM list I suggested?
Would it help the sponsoring DDs to decide which Uploader additions they
approve, without having to consider it (and list grounds for rejections)
on a case-by-case basis?

Possibly DMs could then be allowed to add other 'official' DMs on the
Uploaders list, but that's really just a minor detail.

Cheers,
-- 
Niko Tyni   ntyni@iki.fi