Re: RFC: Debian Quality Assurance Group
On Sun, May 02, 1999 at 02:12:21AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > I have adjusted Vincent Renardias' proposal which Martin Schulze
> > kindly dug out of the archives. Here it is, and I hope you all
> > will have something to say about it, especially if there are any
> > errors to correct. After we make a conclusion and any needed changes,
> > we must determine where to put this.
>
> I wonder why you have skipped most of the text from my proposal?
No I didn't! Or at least it was not my intention to do so. Please point
me to the parts of the text you *posted* I missed...
> You are trying to redifine QA. Please find out what Quality
> Assurance stands for. And please go back and read the text
> I have posted.
No. You did NOT post this part.
> For example it tells you:
>
> What is debian-qa and is it eatable?
>
> QA stands for Quality Assurance and is intended to keep the quality
> of the distribution as high as it should be. At the moment there is
> no real Quality Assurance for Debian.
>
> Do we need Quality Assurance?
>
> With the growing number of developers working on Debian (>500
> registrated developers at the moment) QA is urgently needed. It is
> very interesting (and usually not the case) that the quality of
> Debian is still that high. With companies having more than 500
> concurrent developers ... I don't want to think about this...
>
> Although we have strict rules (Policy) that defines requirements for
> packages there is still missing a "department" which assures that
> every package is packaged well and integrates in the system nicely.
I'll be glad to include something like this - but I first have to see
it! You posted only the uploads related material, and when I asked you
to give me the whole thing you couldn't. Can you do it now?
> Working on orphaned packages is only a side effect of the QA team.
> It is NOT the main goal of QA.
[in reply to the previous message, too]
I didn't think that it was the main goal, just a (visible) duty of the
group members until the maintainer is found (or the package withdrawn).
I'll be happy to rephrase/change any part of the text that conflicts
with this. And remember, the text is just a start.
--
enJoy -*/\*- http://jagor.srce.hr/~jrodin/
Reply to: