* Christian Kurz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20001203 14:24]: > > The Build-Depends: I didn't count but I guess about 80 - 90% get > > Also I wonder how you can guess that the number is so high? I think > it would be only about 10-20& judging from looking at the bug > reports.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. 80-90% of my NM applicants get it work. > In my opinion it's not the job of the application manager to fix > packages. I don't fix his package. I tell him about errors, explain them and have him fix it. > If a new maintainer has no sponsor, he should first get one > assigned, who will guide him and check the packages. After he passed > this test, he should be processed by the NMs and not earlier. That's ok for me. Talk to the guys responsible for the NM process and change it -- but please make sure you have enough sponsors. > What do you want to state with this sentence? You forgot that it's > easier to send a mail to an experined developer telling him his package > has wrong build-dependency then sending such a mail to a new maintainer. I don't believe this. An experienced developer is more likely to ignore you than a NM because he is 'experienced' anyway and the NM knows he has still much to learn. (Yes, I have experienced exactly this when telling people about using the new WNPP. The new developers appreciate your help, the existing developers ignore you). > Did you ever take a look how much stuff Adrian is doing for debian > and qa in debian? If not, I would suggest that you first examine > this I know what Adrian does, and I ADORE him for his work. I think Adrian is one of the best guys in Debian, and I feel really bad about him leaving the QA group. And I do think he has a point, but what he wants is not possible in the current framework (ie it's not the job of an AM to sponsor a application). > before blaming him for such small bug. Ah, here the Build-Depends is a "small bug" but in the case of my applicant, it's serious... The build dependency problem in "patch" was a serious problem for ME when I tried to make a hierarchy of build dependencies, and that's why I filed a bug. > The people I know in the NM queue read the documention and if > somehthing is unclear to them, I explain it and then undersand it > and fix their packages. That's the same I do. > > uploading my package" which I proposed earlier in this thread (and to > > This is not needed since there's lintian and a lot of sponsors who can > check the rest of the package for bugs, that lintian won't catch. There IS lintian. But please explain why most of the packages I receive from appliants are not lintian clean. I don't think they are too lazy. I just think it's a problem with the documentation. A check list would help, I think. -- Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpvuMpFOjzfV.pgp
Description: PGP signature
