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

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

Hi again,

Le Fri, May 30, 2008 at 11:40:53AM +0200, Frans Pop a écrit :
> - packages that are clearly actively maintained (can be seen from changelog)
> - packages that are maintained by active teams
> There should normally be no need to NMU in such cases and just preparing a 
> good patch for the BTS should be sufficient.

Le Fri, May 30, 2008 at 11:49:14AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> On 30/05/08 at 17:38 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > 
> > "something the BTS" does not
> > imply communication. One can send a patch to the BTS and upload a NMU
> > without ever asking if it is welcome. Therefore I would much prefer that
> > the DEP clarifies this by writing that the use of DELAYED is mandatory
> > if the NMUer does not ask if the upload is welcome.
>  - You think that giving some time should be mandatory.

I think that when the mainainer is active, he has to be consulted if a
NMU is planned. As a compromise with those who disagree, I propose that
he should be given time to react.

The DEP introduces many improvements, so I would be very sorry if they
would be bundled with a section whose possible interpretation is that
sending a patch to the BTS is a good reason to push one's favorite
changes in the archives without asking the person first who has the
primary responsability for the package. Some strong reactions in this
thread suggest that we need to be clear on this.

> result in more cases where the NMUer would not give some time to the
> maintainer.

Exactly, I propose that the maintainer can say "no, thank you" whithout
it becoming a crisis.

Have a nice day,

Charles Plessy
Wakō, Saitama, Japan

Reply to: