Re: DEP1: Clarifying policies and workflows for Non Maintainer Uploads (NMUs)
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 08:58:50AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Mon, 26 May 2008, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > Could you elaborate? It certainly has been my understanding
> > that if you NMU a package, you are responsible for any breakage you
> > cause .
> Check how we handled the switch to gcc4.3, a few people NMUed dozens of
> package each and while they assume responsibility for breakage that they
> cause they certainly didn't follow those packages in details after their
> They probably looked after FTFBS or other RC bugs because they appear
> on their QA page (http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=<login>) but
> they probably didn't subscribe to the PTS of those packages and didn't
> handle bug reports as if they were the maintainer.
I don't see any substantial difference here - I don't think people are
suggesting that doing an NMU means you have to take on all the
responsibilities of maintainer but keeping an eye on the package for
breakage is reasonable and to a good approximation tracking RC bugs
should be adequate. I'd certainly expect anyone doing NMUs to do at
least that, though I tend to do this by subscribing to the PTS.
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."