Re: package ownership in Debian
On 7/28/06, MJ Ray <email@example.com> wrote:
Joerg Jaspert <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Simply change the NMUs to be always 0-day, for all bugs >=3Dnormal. Which
> means - upload and mail to BTS at the same time.
Would that mean we get BTS+NMU tennis instead of BTS tennis,
where differences of opinion over what is a serious bug result
in 0-day NMUs as well as BTS reopens?
The key trouble is that non-maintainers are often not familiar
with the history of the package and the difficult decisions which
have been taken and some don't bother to follow the references
given in the changelog. Meanwhile, there's some pressure not
to make the debian dir so verbose it includes transcripts of
That's right, but we're not talking about me uploading stuff to fix
the kernel, for example. There's a team and i'm not in that team, so
it makes no sense i jump the gun and upload the kernel to fix a
= normal bug. It isn't that easy to figure out at first, but if well written
somewhere (policy? developers reference?) could work.
I'm not sure what the solution is, but 0-day always seems a big
step backwards for Quality Control. More co-maints seems a
better idea as a step forwards.
0day for >= normal bugs, maybe and just maybe is a step backwards
for QA in sid, but who knows for sure if the final result won't be
better? It includes our upcoming releases, and the motivation of
developers encouraged for work more cooperatively and ban the
"my packages, my stuff, don't touch them!" concept.