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

Re: The Debian Maintainers GR

On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 10:36:46 +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <he@ftwca.de> said: 

> (ii) Debian has a QA problem. Sponsorship did nothing to improve
>      it. In fact, I believe sponsorship to be one of the reasons for
>      it. 

        This seems like an issue for educating sponsors who are
 sponsoring packages without ensuring the package meets the requisite
 quality standards.  I have personally found that sponsoring a package
 is, for me, an exercise that takes about two to three times the time I
 would need to package the software myself, from scratch; but I think
 this is far from the norm.

        Perhaps putting together  guidelines and processes for the
 sponsor is something that we should look into?

>        (2) As soon as someone is in the DM keyring, a DD can give him
>            upload rights for virtually every package by adding the DM
>            to the Uploaders field and adding the DM-Upload-Allowed
>            field.

        Hmm. A maintainer like that could as easily et up a process of
 blindly re-uploading any package they want, really.  Unless we educate
 the DD sponsor, this is a current problem; I agree that the DM
 procedure might make this less of a hassle for the sponsor.

        The idea, of course, is that this is supposed to be used only for
 people who have a demonstrated track record of packaging a specific
 piece of software, I am not sure how a violation of this assumption is
 going to be policed/regulated -- but perhaps a first step is working on
 the guidelines for the sponsor/advocate and the minimal baseline of
 checks  to be performed on the packages before the packages are
 sponsored/person is advocated for DM.

"The wisest mind has something yet to learn." -George Santayana
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: