Re: Bug#625449: Permanent BSP patch
On 05/04/2011 11:43 AM, Neil McGovern wrote:
> On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 08:58:57AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>> On 03/05/11 at 15:38 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>>> I agree that the resulting wording of patch is suboptimal, and that
>>> recommending 0-day NMUs is not the way to go. We are rarely in need for
>>> action in less than a couple of days in Debian, so the current policy
>>> seems fine to me.
>> The Developers' reference gives recommendations to developers, it is not
>> binding. If you think that a RC bug needs to be fixed with a 0-day NMU,
>> you are still free to ignore the recommendation and proceed with your
>> 0-day NMU. However, in the general case, I don't think that we should
>> *recommend* 0-day NMUs.
>>
>
> I'll repeat again, that this has been the policy for the last 5 years.
> This bug is an attemt to document what is actually happening.
The current policy is indeed 0-day NMUs for RC bug fixes without any
maintainer activity where the bug is at least 7 days old AFAICT. Though
the focus should always be to do no harm as NMUer and to not feel
offended by NMUs as maintainer IMHO. In practice I usually do 2-day NMUs
myself unless I already got maintainer approval.
Maybe it's better to get a zeroNMU list per package like lowNMU (per
maintainer) where maintainers approve 0-day RC bug NMUs for the packages
that are listed on the zeroNMU list? This would have the benefit that
maintainers who agree with 0-day NMUs for RC bugs can do so explicitly.
Cheers
Luk
Reply to: