-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 10:03:14PM +0100, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > > Joe Nahmias wrote: > > > What if we add a new type to the wnpp package 'RFS' = Ready/Request > > > For Sponsorship? > > > Comments? > > > > AFAIK, the set of RFS is not a subset of previous ITP. They also > > include ITA > > in this case, the ITA could be retitled to RFS. Quite so.
> > and possibly RF-yet-another-S for packages already in the archive in > > case a previous sponsor lacks time or similar. > > you could file a new RFS bug in this case, or just ask on -mentors, as > the consensus decides. I would go with filing another bug to <alert type="buzzword"> leverage </alert> the existing Debian infrastructure (ie. WNPP, BTS, etc...). > > Also, your assuming that DDs intending to package are willing to sponsor. > yes, he is. but it seems that the system would work either way. Well, if you would really like to know my assumptions, they are: a) checking someone else's package is less work than packaging something from scratch (I know that this isn't always the case, but I think it's valid to a first approximation). b) DDs are interested in seeing new packages added to Debian in the quickest manner possible (ie. developers are lazy, and would rather re-use someone else's packaging effort instead of re-inventing the wheel). My main goals for this proposal are to: (a) expand the pool of available sponsors with a wider call for sponsors[0] (b) assist non-DDs in finding sponsors using the infrastructure Debian already has in place. Also, as a side effect, this would move most of the RFS traffic off of - -mentors, leaving the list for ppl who want help with creating packages. Anyone else have anything to say? Should I cc -policy and let them debate it? Joe Nahmias, DD wannabe, who thinks his AM is really named Godot... :-) [0] For example: A random DD -- not subscribed to -mentors, but subscribed to -devel-announce, reads the wnpp email, and sees a package that has an RFS and looks somewhat interesting...even if they wouldn't necessarily want to put in the effort to package it from scratch, they might want to expend the [lesser] effort of checking another's package and uploading it...). -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+a2jFKl23+OYWEqURAuouAJ99yI8GifHRMGUUY4PsQ6W8qsA+QACdEEuU xNHEerKLQiHGz0ywTAfeWW8= =ffEt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
