On 22/02/2009, at 12.47, Michael Bienia wrote: > On 2009-02-21 20:52:47 +0100, Morten Kjeldgaard wrote: >> Oh, I didn't make it quite clear: I imagine that packages uploaded to >> the PPA would be the ones that passed reviewing with 2 advocates. So >> essentially, these package would be in a state ready for upload to >> Ubuntu's archive. I agree that dealing with every upload in the PPA >> would be unmanagable. > > I guess I'm missing something here. When a package has two advocates > why > not upload it to the archive? Or do you mean upload it to the archive > and to the PPA? What's the benefit of it? Is the NEW processing that > slow that it blocks reviewing?
After FF there's a period of ~ 2 months where we can't upload new packages. I would be good to be able to finish the processing of those packages that are _almost_ finished, but just didn't make it. While it's still in fresh memory of the reviewers and uploaders. Also, many uploaders are quite disappointed. It would be a consolation if we published those packages that didn't quite make it (but still get +2 votes) on the PPA. They should be compiled for the version they "missed", currently jaunty. Thus, the PPA would contain a "preview" of packages that didn't make it for jaunty, but will be included in karmic. Cheers, Morten -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
