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

Re: DEP1: Clarifying policies and workflows for Non Maintainer Uploads (NMUs)

On Mon, 26 May 2008 15:17:03 +0200, Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> said: 

> On Mon, 26 May 2008, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>> Once you NMU, you are that package's daddy for *ALL* bugs that could
>> even remotely be related to your NMU, until its maintainer shows up
>> again...  People who can't deal with that, must not NMU.  Send the
>> patch to the BTS instead.

> This is not sustainable on the archive as a whole.

        Could you elaborate?  It certainly has been my understanding
 that if you NMU a package, you are responsible for any breakage you
 cause .

> It's always best top have an active developer for the most important
> packages so that DD who are not familiar with the code don't have to
> NMU at all... but in general, there's no need to go to that extreme
> route of saying that once NMUed you're the maintainer until the
> maintainer comes back.

        I do not think that the NMU'er is the maintainer, and is
 responsible for new upstream, long standing bugs, or the other things
 the maintainer does. However, I think it is also unsustainable to  give
 the impression that drive by NMU's are just fine, and it is OK to leave
 a train of wrecked packages in your wake.

        This comes back to the principle that one is responsible for
 what one uploads into the archive; if one's upload causes bugs, one is
 responsible for taking care of the bugs.

Dammit Jim, I'm an actor, not a doctor.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>  
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: