On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 23:03:33 +0200 Vincent Danjean <vdanjean...@free.fr> wrote:
> On 11/06/2010 09:54, Thomas Goirand wrote: > > Right, I was being silly. Also, the word "experimental" adds more fear > > to the user than just "devel", which is good. Let me rephrase then. How > > about we accept MORE packages with LESS checks in Experimental, and have > > new maintainers forced in that repository, then if they are seen as > > responsive, we upload to SID? Could that be a sponsor's decision already > > right now, and be considered a good practice? > > I disagree with this new proposed used of experimental. If you do this, > you will end up with newbies using experimental to get new stuff and > breaking their system to us a big on-going transition in experimental. +1 Also, to get into experimental, NEW packages still have to go through the NEW queue and the ftpmaster team. A lot of packages that need sponsoring from mentors.debian.net are in no fit state to be accepted. This would be an abuse of experimental and a hindrance to other packages getting through NEW. OTOH if those requesting sponsorship were more open to packaging some of the orphaned packages listed under WNPP and qa.debian.org which have already been through NEW .... http://qa.debian.org/orphaned.html Number of packages: 250 http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=packa...@qa.debian.org main (428) What about if Debian QA packages were all to be deemed suitable for DM upload, including those which have been orphaned for over 2 months without a change of maintainer? Maybe when an orphaned package is uploaded with the change of maintainer to Debian QA, the DM upload field could also be set? I would be much more likely to consider sponsoring again if the people requesting sponsorship were prepared to work on existing orphaned packages rather than always insisting on new stuff. i.e. one reason packages are left pending is because NEW packages are a lot more work to sponsor than orphaned packages. Just because a package is orphaned, doesn't always mean that the package itself is unwanted, just that the original maintainer lost interest / time. There are some orphaned packages with both high popcon and high bug counts. Personally, I'd be much happier sponsoring uploads of those packages, including putting the packages under DM. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/
pgp4Sy7mcIhRL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
