>>>>> "Andrey" == Andrey Rakhmatullin <w...@debian.org> writes:
Andrey> On Wed, Dec 04, 2024 at 03:30:23PM -0800, Xiyue Deng wrote:
>> It would be great to have a group of DDs that are willing to
>> regularly check for RFS bugs / mentors.d.n and offer sponsorship
Andrey> Sure. This is true since the beginning of the RFS process,
Andrey> and as nothing stops people from doing this, but based on my
Andrey> observations such a group was never larger than 1-3 people,
Andrey> just knowing that this is a good idea is not enough.
Perhaps sharing reasons why people don't do this would help us
understand what a change might look like.
For myself, my reasons for not being involved in RFS have varied across
my Debian Journey.
1) Right now, I am behind on Debian work I have committed to, and I'd
rather get that done than work on picking up new obligations.
2) Sponsoring a package if you do it right is a lot of work. If it is
going through new, it's really important that you review all the
copyright and license statements and make a determination about whether
it fits the DFSG. I firmly believe that work needs to be done by a DD
and should never be outsourced to someone who hasn't been trusted to do
that work by the project.
I hate doing that. tooling has made it easier over the years.
3) I think it is important to grab a pristine copy of the upstream
3) I think it's important to make sure that all changes are documented.
If not in Debian, that means going back to the upstream, grabbing
pristine upstream sources and diffing what is proposed at the upstream
source for Debian against those. If it is already in Debian, it means
effectively doing a debdiff between the version already in Debian and
the version proposed. The tooling for all that isn't great, and used to
be really bad.
4) At least back in the day there was an expectation that if you
sponsored a package you would test it. So it would involve learning how
to use the software and then testing to make sure it worked. Perhaps we
care about this less today.
5) At least back in the day there was an expectation that if you
sponsored an upload you would be available to sponsor any fixes to bugs
introduced in the upload.
For me, promising future availability was a big ask.
6) I felt there was an obligation to work with the person you were
sponsoring to get the package into shape. Sometimes that was a long
process. If they didn't have good email turn-around time I got into the
situation above where I had inadvertantly made a longer term commitment
than I was ready for.
There are many points in my Debian journey where if I could have made a
2-3 hour commitment to sponsoring packages without taking on future
responsibilities at future times, I would have been willing to do so.
(Not today unfortunately).
As I understand it there never has been (and is not today) a responsible
way to sponsor without at least taking on some chance of future
commitments.
