Re: Giving someone else package-removal/override-editing abilities?
>This was largely because there was no good tool to make changes to the
>overrides of just one package. However, Daniel Silverstone recently
>wrote a script, so such requests should be dealt with much more
>quickly.
That's very cool. :-)
>In any case, it's also not that removals are
>only done by James. Daniel also does removals, and I'm in regular
>contact with him.
That's very cool as well. :-)
>Well, you'd simply make a QA person an ftpmaster, but as I said above,
I was thinking that ftpmasters probably have other abilities as well (editing
katie, changing the web pages, reviewing NEW packages, handling byhand stuff)
-- I was noting that the routine chores of removing obsolete packages and
updating priority/section seem to constitute a lot of requests which don't
require a lot of thought compared to the others.
>I like the division of power and don't think it's currently a major
>problem. I don't know the status of #225537 [1], but package removals
>are normally done fairly quickly.
It's worst-case performance that hurts here -- average performance is great.
>[1] I assume the delay might be related to the bug asking for removal
>from unstable and stable. ftpmaster cannot do stable removals, they
>are only done at point releases. Perhaps cloning the bug and having
>one for stable and one for unstable would help, but I'm only
>speculating here.
I'll try that....
Actually, there are a fair number of bugs languishing against ftp.debian.org
because they're for removals from woody. I suppose that these don't belong
as bugs against ftp.debian.org, and just clutter the bug list up -- they seem
not to get noticed when new stable point releases are made, anyway. However,
they belong as bugs against *something*.
Perhaps there should be a standard pseudo-package for archive bugs against the
stable release, for the stable release manager to check? (Or is there and
I'm missing it?)
Reply to: