Hi Chris, On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 02:44:32PM +0000, Chris Lamb wrote: > > I think the suggestion of randomized spot checking is meant to replace - > > not add - to the present system of checking that penalizes uploads of > > existing source but new binaries. So human resources should not be the > > issue. > > In my experience, time/energy/focus is not as fungible or easily > transferable as you imply.
I share your assumption that if we try to get a real random set of packages checked instead of checking those who are ending up by random reasons in new we will end up with less re-checked packages. However, this does not give any good reason for keeping the habit to re-check packages where a resulting binary package is not inside the package pool. It somehow reminds me to those people who were asked: "Why are you doing this?" and gave the answer: "Since we did so all the time." We all know that ftpmasters have a lot of work and this thread is about convincing ftpmaster to stop some work that does not belong to their initial task which is *checking new source packages*. So far I've read a single example in this thread that a developer was happy about the check since a mistake was avoided. But this would have happened by a random user via BTS as well. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de