Re: Who should be in the QA Group Committee
- To: Raphael Hertzog <rhertzog@hrnet.fr>
- Cc: Debian Quality Assurance <debian-qa-private@lists.debian.org>, Vincent Renardias <vincent@debian.org>, Richard Braakman <dark@xs4all.nl>
- Subject: Re: Who should be in the QA Group Committee
- From: Martin Schulze <joey@finlandia.Infodrom.North.DE>
- Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 22:07:01 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] 19990920220701.V18363@finlandia.infodrom.north.de>
- Reply-to: Martin Schulze <joey@infodrom.north.de>
- In-reply-to: <19990920162653.B7601@k6.resI.insa-lyon.fr>
- References: <19990918223755.A17383@cibalia.gkvk.hr> <19990918233143.A30750@hrnet.fr> <19990919114322.A18363@finlandia.infodrom.north.de> <19990919190150.A2169@k6.resI.insa-lyon.fr> <19990919231820.S18363@finlandia.infodrom.north.de> <19990920095503.C6762@k6.resI.insa-lyon.fr> <19990920144529.G24581@troi.orgatech.de> <19990920150939.A6878@k6.resI.insa-lyon.fr> <19990920154157.L24581@troi.orgatech.de> <19990920162653.B7601@k6.resI.insa-lyon.fr>
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Le Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 03:41:57PM +0200, Martin Schulze écrivait:
>
> [Joey I'm still getting the mail 3 times, maybe you're not yet on
> the moderators list ... ]
Hmm, wonderful. I am in the moderators file, and apparently no
mail got distributed through the list yet. I haven't found something
wrong or broken, Rince will check now. [30min later] I've checked
and corrected it as well.
Hmm, he told me that there has to be an Approved: header.
Will add it automagically.
[30min later]
This is done now, tested on another list so should work.
> > Both lists could be similar, but both lists don't contain the same
> > information.
>
> Well most of the QA task are more or less package related. Of course,
As a result, yes. As the source, no.
> > I disagree. If there is too much to do, then we need more people.
>
> Well, I can only agree with you but tell me how you will get more
> people ? Do you have money to pay them ? :) We are only volunteers.
I don't know how to aquire new people. However, I know that it won't
work without a proper framework. This is what you're doing and I'm
really happy that you have stepped forward to create this framework,
even if I disagree in certain details.
> > Ignoring our problems is the current way Debian tries to work but it
> > does not work. That's a mistake. Please don't continue with it.
>
> Keeping the task list not too big is NOT ignoring our problem. In fact,
> we can list all our problems on a separate page if you want.
That doesn't make sense, I'm sorry, thus I strongly disagree.
> > I don't think that an area with Packages files would be required. I
> > would just open http://qa.debian.org/packages/ and a directory for
> > each package where the files will be put in, completely with .changes
> > files etc. The links would be added to the BTS then. Thus if the
> > maintainer doesn't react, the whole dir would be copied into the
> > proper incoming directory and removed there. Also people could
> > download and test packages.
>
> Ok I guess, this would be only only a big Incoming directory ...
Yes.
> then we can had this information to dupload so that we can just do
> dupload --to qa <package>.changes
Hmm, no. Only proper people (i.e. qa core team members) should be able
to upload there, according to your policy, or better, furthering the
policy.
> > No, you don't. You said, however, that the list must not grow too much
> > and that's where I disagree. If there are problems and tasks, they have
> > to be addressed, regardless of how many other tasks are there.
>
> Yes, but adding them to the list doesn't mean that they will be adressed.
That may be true, or may not.
> Since we don't agree I think that I will have to write yet another web
> page that will only list the 50 first tasks to do. Would this be
> acceptable for you ?
Args. As long as you will present all tasks as well, that's sufficient.
You have introduced priorities, so use them to select tasks for the
first page. I guess that I won't complain about that then.
> This way you can fill up the task list but most of the people will never
> look at it and just concentrate on the first tasks to do ... for me the
> most important thing is what is really done (and not only what has
> to be done). :-)
And this is wrong. This has lead us to where we are now. Some pkg's
are maintained (this is done) boot-floppies are not done. Thus we
cannot install pure potato.
> BTW, I intend to add yet another page for "tasks beeing worked on".
*This* sounds far better than restricting the listing to 50 most
important ones. Please do it so.
Regards,
Joey
--
This is Linux Country. On a quiet night, you can hear Windows reboot.
Reply to: