Re: Question for candidate Towns [Was, Re: DPL election IRC Debate - Call for questions]
On Sun, Mar 06, 2005 at 03:02:34PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Anthony Towns <email@example.com> wrote:
> > I actually think that's a good result: far better to keep track of the
> > problematic packages, than to just REJECT them with a reason like
> > "doesn't seem like a good idea" and have them randomly reuploaded later.
> > It also seems like a better idea to let packages that don't seem like
> > a good idea sit in the queue, rather than get uploaded and distributed
> > around the world.
> I'm certainly not suggesting that they be rejected out of hand, and
> accepting them isn't the correct decision either. Currently, though,
> it's impossible to tell the difference between "This package is awkward"
> and "This package is being ignored". Making the distinction explicit
> causes little harm.
Especially when the maintainer uploading the packages is *not* made aware of
the fact that the package is awkward, and any input he may provide to making
it less awkward is just plainly ignored.