[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: quality assurance for games



On Fri, 23. Nov 21:44 Bart Martens <bartm@debian.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 09:43:16PM +0100, Markus Koschany wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > one month ago i have started a similar thread on debian-devel-games but
> > haven't got much feedback although at least one team member replied and
> > supported my proposal. [1]
> > [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-games/2012/10/msg00062.html
> > 
> > My original idea was to track orphaned games, incorporate them into the
> > games team and eventually remove them if nobody is interested in
> > maintaining these games. I think i have identified some candidates and
> > therefore would like to ask the qa-list for advice and whether it makes
> > sense to pursue the idea.
> 
> If you want to adopt orphaned packages, go ahead.  If you want to maintain the
> packages in the games team, that's your choice.  But I don't see the point in
> incorporating the packages into the games team if it is still uncertain who is
> going to maintain them there.

That's a misunderstanding. Of course nobody would join a team and
dump some random packages on it before talking to the people who are
involved. 

Therefore the idea was to track orphaned games, to find out if someone is
interested in maintaining them within the team and if not to remove the package.
Besides the idea stemmed from the fact that some of those packages were orphaned
by the Games Team and that they should have been removed already three years ago.

[..]

> > As far as i understand the removal process [2], ftp-masters need some
> > sort of reference for such a decision. I hope this thread gathers enough
> > feedback and can later be considered as such a reference.
> > [2] http://wiki.debian.org/ftpmaster_Removals
> 
> I think it's OK to gather a few facts and decide to submit RM bugs if you're
> convinced that removing the packages is the right choice without much feedback
> gathering.

Sounds good. But now i'm wondering, why not making the next step and remove packages
automatically which have been orphaned for more than two years and also have a
low popcon value for example? If not much feedback gathering is required
this could be an automatism at the beginning of each release cycle.

Regards,

Markus

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: