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

Re: Debian QA Policy Draft

On Sun, Mar 28, 1999 at 09:53:01PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Maintainers:
> ------------
>   How much work is expected from the maintainers?

Can we refrain from formalising this too much? Personally, I quite like the
way this works at the moment -- if there's a buggy package that you can fix,
you can send a patch to the maintainer who'll get around to it when s/he
feels like, or you can ask if the maintainer minds if you do an NMU. I've
fixed a few bugs like this, and one of these has always worked.

I just don't like having some metric by which we can decide that some
maintainers are doing their job or not: it's not a job in the first place.

>   . Email the QDAG if they 'give up' on a bug.

Having a list of bugs that need fixing would be nifty; but it doesn't seem
particularly helpful: almost all the bugs older than about a month have
probably been more or less given up on, and their easy to find out by
subscribing to -bug-reports.

And I doubt too many people would mind having fixes to bugs forwarded to
them while they're still working on them either, so I don't see that as
much of an issue.

> DQAG Evolution:
> ---------------
>   Scan the bug tracking system for bugs older than 3 months that are
>   fixable and provide patches to the debian maintainers (and
>   eventually also to the upstream maintainers).

Older than two years is enough of a stress at the moment. :)

See http://master.debian.org/~ajt/oldbugs.txt


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred.

``Like the ski resort of girls looking for husbands and husbands looking
  for girls, the situation is not as symmetrical as it might seem.''

Attachment: pgpu49EDxAgps.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: