On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 08:27:22AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Actually, the counter-argument is that we don't want to make it
> *harder* to do a QA upload.
That was not the counter-argument back then [1], it might be a new /
different counter-argument.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-qa/2007/08/msg00073.html
> Currently, it's "apt-get source ; make change ;
> dput". If we used a VCS, we would have to create:
> - a process to auto-import orphaned packages into the VCS
> - procedures to commit changes to VCS before doing QA uploads
>
> I don't have numbers about that, but a fair share of QA uploads are done
> by one- or two-timers, even a majority of uploads is done by QA folks.
> We don't want to make it harder for those one-timers to improve the
> status of orphaned packages.
Frankly, I don't buy this. Nowadays everybody should be able to work
with common $VCS. But even when this is not the case, $VCSs are always
unofficial wrt the archive: it is not *mandatory* to use them, even
for normal (non-QA) NMUs.
So even checking in orphaned packages in $VCS does not make it harder
to do a QA upload. If you want to use it: fine, otherwise you can
always upload the "old" way.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature