Re: The Debian Maintainers GR
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 10:36:46 +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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
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
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 <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C