On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 09:39:25PM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote: > On 04/11/01, Matthew Vernon wrote: > > Indeed. Historically, debian-qa have been the people who deal with > > orphaned packages - there are moves to make the BTS-generated traffic > Well, but not only time is changing and I think it's time that debian-qa > changes a bit moving away from the maintaince of orphaned packages to > take care of QA issues. It seems that part of the problem with this has been that most of what would be done by -qa has actually happened on -devel or the ports lists - there is not that much that is specifically the buisness of -qa. > > Fair enough; there seems to be general agreement that filing wishlist > > bug reports would be a sensible initial approach (though there seems > > to be some disagreement as to who should do it, and whether -devel > Well, I wouldn't say that there's a agreement about this especially > since this wouldn't ensure that really all packages get fixed and either > all packages should be fixed or none. It strikes me that if you want to get general agreement on stuff then -devel (or in this case the -kde and -gtk-gnome lists) is the place to go. -qa doesn't seem particularly relevant in that quality isn't an oddment that ought to get hidden away from general view. -- "You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."
Description: PGP signature