On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 20:00:21 +0000, Gustavo Franco
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On 7/29/06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 16:27:26 +0000, Gustavo Franco
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
> I wrote that it could be integrated with PTS, somebody else
> suggested a new header in control. I think subscribe/unsubscribe a
> package (using signed messages) to "LowThresholdNMU" with notes that
> could be queried by mail and included in PTS web interface, would
> do.
Ah. Sounds like a decent idea.
>> There is nothing wrong with offering to help out with packages
>> either -- and nothing wrong with people forming teams. Rammning it
>> down people's throats won't work, though.
> Don't you see that the team thing is to avoid a random developer
> that have no idea what's going on with the history of that package,
> do the upload ? The packages that aren't under group maintenance and
> will never be, needs more not so strict NMU rules.
Seems to me you need rules exactly as strict, since the people
doing the NMU are less familiar with the package, and thus need to
exercise more care, and need to bring in the input of the person most
experienced with the package. Lowering the upload threshold from
people unfamiliar with the package probably would lead to a drop in
quality, simply because it is harder to package something one is
unfamiliar with.
> Please don't attack the team model, without pointing where it could
> be better if it was a one-man approach. "The team foo is broken!"
> but it would better with you or me maintaining the package(s) alone?
> Who knows?
I would think that my packages would be better than some of
the worst case team maintained packages, so yes, I would know. And
ritisizing one alternative does not require that one shows advantages
in other alternatives -- for a true comparison of the alternatives,
one should not be afraid of an honest, unflinching critique of all
options on the table.
> I think the discussion is around how to put the teams to work well
> and some kind of better relationship between the teams and less
> strict NMU rules to non team maintaned packages.
I have not quarrel with the former. I don't see why the
number of people involved in packaging should have anything to do
with NMU rules; in any individual case, the severity of the BUG, the
responsiveness of the maintainer(s), the amount of time spent seeking
input and advice from the experts on that package count for more than
the number of people in the uploaders field.
manoj
--
Mediocrity finds safety in standardization. Frederick Crane
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
