could somehow signal or automatically raise the priority of those said packages waiting to get in.
I guess it's a common case, specially for new libraries, since it can potentially hold important new
features or fixes for packages that are already in the archive.
I think it wouldn't hurt, since it would give more flow to updating what's already in the archive,
without giving too much incentive to unnecessary bloat :)
It's not a complete solution to anything but might help to improve the process a bit. I currently have
a package wating for a new lib :D and it happened about 2 months ago with another package of mine,
on that moment I uploaded both at the same time by distraction and ended with a severe dependency
breakage.
Regards,
Eduardo
Joel Aelwyn wrote:
On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 06:50:05PM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 07:42:58PM +0100, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
IMHO, Debian has a serious double-problem here and needs to attack it. ftp-masters should, as I understand the role, be a purely administrative function: keep the archive running. No policy decisions should be made by ftp-masters.Unfortunately reality isn't so simple. In practice, the ftp-masters
In that light, fully automatic NEW processing will not hurt at all (I agree that a delay of a few days is sensible to give us time to react to the worst problem cases.)
have also become the review point for new packages. We *need* new
packages reviewing just to filter out some of the worst of the stupid
from the archive; frankly we need more than just new packages
reviewing. However, splitting that task out would probably be a good
idea.
I've had packages sent back based on reviews. And while I may be a grouchy cuss at times, especially over some of the other issues I see with ftpmaster, I have no complaint about having gotton one back, even when I didn't agree with the reasoning. The ftpmaster member involved and I discussed it, and (at least as far as I recall) I ended up resubmitting a package that was somewhere in between, but closer to their preference than my initial one.
Proposals have been made about splitting the task of package review from the administrative tasks of running the archive proper, recently; they were rejected. I consider that highly unfortunate, but if you really want to see it, you're going to have to either convince the ftpmasters that the proposal really does have merit enough, or convince the DPL that this is a large enough problem that it's leading to a non-functional team.
I would suggest reading the archives on -project, for last month, where
most of this has already been thoroughly discussed, but I really don't
think that removing the filtering is a sane idea.
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
