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

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

Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
On 30/05/08 at 01:44 -0700, Richard Hecker wrote:


You failed to find consensus in the thread I referenced in the
previous message.

... which led me to thinking of what we could do to improve the current
situation while staying consensual.

Because I didn't find consensus in the thread you referenced, I should
be forbidden to propose anything about NMUs forever?

While I admire your desire to improve the current situation, it
looks to me like you still have not found consensus. You can
claim that it exists, but others see value in contacting an active
maintainer before uploading the NMU.

In years past, I would route all email through an employment
account (I basically lived there anyway and it was the best option
to assure timely reception and response ;-). In this environment,
it was common to remind people that vacations could last a week
or two. It was amazing how often people were inclined to push
the panic button because they had waited a few days for a

DEP1 reminds me of those days. If you eliminate the goal of
contacting the maintainer first, you can easily push through the
NMU via one of the DELAYED queues. We are left to rehash all
those old arguments about how long is too long and why
someone needs such a long vacation. Although it may seem
like a dirty word to you, I do suspect that these arguments were
worked out when the developers reference was first put
together. I just do not see the value when some
Johnny-come-lately decides that all the decisions need to
be reworked.

You have already described my comments as an exception.
You can still claim consensus as you explain why this
rewrite is an improvement. Lack of a further response
from me does not indicate that I suddenly agree with you.


Reply to: