On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 09:11:57PM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote: > Wouter Verhelst <wou...@grep.be> writes: > > On Sat, Apr 04, 2020 at 08:03:09PM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote: > >> Adam Borowski <kilob...@angband.pl> writes: > >> > Idea: perhaps we could make no unrestricted (maintainer, team, or QA) > >> > upload > >> > for 10 years a RC bug on its own? That threshold could then be gradually > >> > reduced to eg. 5 years, as worst offenders get fixed. > >> > >> One could deprecate old Standards-Version and require a version not that > >> was not superceded for more than five years. > > > > That's not what Standards-Version means. > > > > You don't get to say "I know my package does not comply with current > > Policy, but the Standards-Version claims an old version of Policy so > > that's fine". You must always be compliant with current policy (in > > unstable), and if policy changes in ways that apply to your package, you > > need to update it. > > > > One of my packages, logtool, hasn't seen an upstream change since the > > early naughties, and as a result there are 7 years between logtool > > 1.2.8-8 and logtool 1.2.8-9. > > > > That however didn't mean it wasn't maintained, just that it didn't need > > any update in 7 years. > > > > The only reason for Standards-Version to exist is so that when you or > > whoever comes after you look at things a few days/weeks/months/years > > down the line, you know what has changed in Policy since it was last > > touched and can use upgrading-checklist.txt > > In my understanding the Standards-Version documents up to which policy > version a package was checked for compliance.
Yes. > One could expect from maintainers that they check their packages for > compliance regularly and that they document that. Perhaps, but it is *also* documented that an upload just to bump the Standards-Version is severely frowned upon. If there is no other reason to upload in 7 years, then the Standards-Version will not be updated, and that is perfectly fine. > For a package that had no documented check for seven years it is OK to > file an RC bug in order to clarify the compliance. Hell no. If you find that the 7-year-old package does not comply with policy in some way because it is outdated (or for whatever other reason), then sure, by all means file a bug at correct severity (RC if it is that). But "this package is feature-complete and hasn't required an update in seven years" is a feature, not a bug. -- <Lo-lan-do> Home is where you have to wash the dishes. -- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22
