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

Re: DEP1: who should be allowed to do QA uploads ?

Ralf Treinen wrote:
> On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 08:50:45AM +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote:
>>  * QA upload.
>> If you want to do an NMU, and it seems that the maintainer is not
>> active, it is wise to check if the package is orphaned. When doing the
>> first QA upload to an orphaned package, the maintainer should be set to
>> Debian QA Group < packages@qa.debian.org >. Orphaned packages which did
>> not have a QA upload yet still have their old maintainer set. There is a
>> list of them at http://qa.debian.org/orphaned.html.
> Just a thought:
> IMHO it would make sense to allow teams other than QA to do QA uploads
> for orphaned packages. Teams focused on a particular toolset (OCaml, perl,
> TeX, kde, gnome, ...) may be better motivated to keep up a minimal
> quality standard for packages using that toolset, and they may be better
> skilled to do this.

Either it's adopted or it's not IMHO. Long time orphaned packages are
not worth shipping and should be removed altogether IMHO. If no one
wants to take care of maintaining it, the package is either not
important or should get a replacement that someone thinks is worth

> Sure, every dd can do a QA upload, the advantage of having another team
> being listed as maintainer would be that this team would receive all the
> bug reports. The team might choose not to adopt the package in order to
> make clear that the package is still orphaned.

A team could adopt the package and request for an adopter (RFA). The
difference is that the package would be maintained in the mean time...

> I do not see how to accomplish this without adding a new field to the
> control file, however, since currently we use maintainer=QA in order to
> indicate that a package is orphaned. 

No, the indication that a package is orphaned is the bug against wnpp.
Changing the maintainer is just to make it more obvious for everyone
involved as the previous maintainer should not be contacted anymore.



Reply to: