Re: Q to all candidates: NEW queue
On 26/03/20 at 14:42 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Roberto C. Sánchez (2020-03-26 14:28:47)
> > That said, I have never had a package rejected for reasons that would
> > outright keep it from entering Debian. Each package I have had
> > rejected could have as easily been accepted into unstable and then
> > fixed after the fact to address whatever the problem was. For
> > instance, omitting a particular file with a distinct (but compatible)
> > license from listing in the copyright file or some similar minor
> > license-related matter. None of those things seem like reasons to
> > hold up a package entering Debian for months to nearly a year.
> > Though, I may be mistaken in that and biased based on my own
> > experience.
>
> Or you might be describing a procedure that has since been improved.
>
> When sharing example cases, it helps if you also mention how long ago it
> happened (I sometimes get surprised how much time has passed when
> checking such facts).
>
> For future cases, I suggest to always file an ITP bugreport before
> pushing a new package, to help encourage ftp team to use that bugreport
> to store responses/remarks from them - and when that happens we can in
> future reference the bugreport when sharing example cases :-)
I think that Roberto's point is that those two workflows are valid:
A/
- package is uploaded
- package waits in NEW
- package gets reviewed, gets accepted in unstable with a bug filed
- bug gets fixed
B/
- package is uploaded
- package gets accepted in unstable
- package gets reviewed, a bug is filed
- bug gets fixed
Except that with (B), we avoid the wait in NEW.
One important question is: how often does the FTP team run into a
package that is so problematic that accepting it in Debian with an RC
bug is not an option?
Lucas
Reply to: