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

Re: DEP1: how to do an NMU

On Saturday 31 May 2008, Luk Claes wrote:
> > "All members of a team becoming unresponsive" is possible, agreed.
> > But it is a hell of a lot less likely than "at least one member of
> > the team being able to respond to urgently needed changes if
> > appropriately notified".
> So, why should there be any special treatment as they are more likely
> to respond early anyway? Or are you questioning normal NMU intents,
> RC/RG bugs and d-d-a announcements as appropriate notifications?

Because bugs may also have been (or seem to have been overlooked). The 
risk here is that the person doing the NMU thinks "oh, that's an old 
issue and the fix seems so simple" and goes ahead and NMUs it, while 
there may be very valid reasons for not fixing it (or at least not with 
_that_ fix).

A follow-up to the bug report with just "hey, this issue seems to be 
forgotten, could someone please take another look as it seems important" 
would then be a lot more appropriate and take a lot less time all around 
then preparing the patch, uploading it to delayed and then getting to 
hear "sorry, this is not good, please remove your NMU from the queue".

Large teams also often have large numbers of issues to deal with. Which 
does mean that (unfortunately) issues may be missed or forgotten about.
Or maybe it is something that is normally taken care of by one particular 
team member and other team members ignored the issue for that reason but 
are capable of picking it up if prompted to do so.

There is just no reason to bypass the maintainers if they are otherwise 
active. In such cases just talking to the maintainers (through the BTS or 
otherwise) is just a lot more appropriate and effective, at least as a 
first step, than going straight to an NMU - even with the safeguards 
incorporated in the DEP.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: