Re: possibly exhausted ftp-masters (Re: Do we still value contributions?
Hi,
On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 09:49:22AM +0000, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu 26 Dec 2019 at 11:29am -05, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
>
> > One interesting thing about this is that I have often wondered if it
> > would be beneficial to have checks on debian/copyright during the life
> > of a package. Checking only once when a package first enters the Debian
> > archive seems to leave open the rather likely possibility that some
> > change in a future upstream release changes or adds some component
> > license that should be documented in debian/copyright. I try to be
> > diligent in this regard and even at times have found that I overlook
> > things.
>
> Well, this is one of the reasons why source package which add new binary
> packages end up in NEW again.
> The full source tree gets checked again at that point as if the source
> package were completely new.
Really? Why?
So far I assumed that simple binary package renames due to shared
library bumps or other API transitions where fast-tracked without full
review, perhaps slightly less so for additions or split-offs of e.g.
-data or -doc packages.
Adding new binaries is an arbitrary (apart from the technical
implementation reason in dak, of course) point in time to recheck a
source package; even more so if this is due to external reasons (binary
name changed to the external API changes, like a PostgreSQL major
version transition).
Maybe we should have a conversation about periodical rechecks, but
packages like rdkit[1] languishing in NEW for almost two months and
counting just because of a new PostgreSQL release is a bit depressing.
Michael
[1] https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/rdkit_201909.1-1.html
Reply to: