On 04/11/01, Mark Brown wrote: > 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. Then do as I suggested in an other email and remove this list after debian-qa-packages has been created. According to your description this list will then be useless and have no further relevant traffic, so that everything can be moved to -devel. > > > 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 Because first this is an issue about the quality of our distribution and therefor the people on the debian-qa list should discuss it and work out a solution that will ensure that all packages will get fixed. Then you can present this suggestion on -devel or other lists and create a timetable, announce it maybe to -devel-anounce or mail the involved developers. But this isn't an issue that can directly be handled on -devel, since it's not a technical problem. Christian -- Debian Developer (http://www.debian.org) 1024/26CC7853 31E6 A8CA 68FC 284F 7D16 63EC A9E6 67FF 26CC 7853
Attachment:
pgpgfJhPjoJzE.pgp
Description: PGP signature