On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 14:29, Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 03/12/08 at 13:56 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: >> Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (03/12/2008): >> > That's not true. We imposed that reviewing step to ourselves, and, if >> > it's doing more harm (by slowing down development and annoying >> > contributors) than good (by detecting mistakes and improving Debian's >> > overall quality), we could simply decide to drop it. (or to drop it >> > partially, for some categories of uploads). >> >> How do you see the legalese aspect? In the harm or good box? > > I don't think that we should drop the legal review (that would probably > be dangerous). However, NEW reviews seem to cover a lot of other > aspects currently, which might explain why it takes so much time. > > If people feel that a reviewing service is needed, we could split > that out of NEW processing and have a separate service (or just use > debian-mentors@ and http://mentors.debian.net). > >> > always let some things get thought while they shouldn't) rather than >> ^^^^^^^ >> through? > yes > -- > | Lucas Nussbaum > | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | > | jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQFJNom02hliNwI7P08RAoBhAJ9qRAXP2ebziJnemQcyN1HBH3h7FwCeO99n > bMlK6n78AO12yLv4nfpIv5o= > =tRXh > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > >
Perhaps a way to relive the ftp-masters is an infrastructure to report errors in NEW packages to the ftp-masters; Then the ftp-masters only need to do an full review on packages which has not gotten any reviews on them, and can reject a package quickly by investigating the error found in the report. -- /Carl Fürstenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
