On Tue, 20 May 2008, Luciano Bello wrote: > - It should be checked with debugging tools (like valgrind :P) > - It should a public VCS
These should be encouraged, and in the cases where packages aren't in a public VCS or QAed properly before upload, the deficiencies should be politely pointed out and maintainers encouraged to rectify. > - It should maintained by a team Team maintenance doesn't automatically make a package better.[1] Furthermore, I don't believe there are many (possibly any!) packages in Debian where the package is "important" and the current maintainer wouldn't accept help. [And if there are, that's a problem which we can deal with on a case-by-case basis.] > - Its patches should be sign-off by reviewers (Raphael Hertzog (hertzog@) > proposed something like this) There isn't enough manpower to do this. While more review is good, blocking development and bug fixing to wait on review is just not sustainable and scalable. [It's not like it's hard for people to interdiff diff.gz's now and see what has changed in each patch; only a few people not directly involved with the package appear to be doing this.] That said, it'd be wonderfull for multiple people to prove me wrong by reviewing all of the patches in base and above, and keep up with the development of those packages while doing so. But I'm not going to hold my breath for it; and we shouldn't hamstring development for it either. Don Armstrong 1: It basically boils down to a problem of manpower; see various other threads which have gone over this in the past. -- A Bill of Rights that means what the majority wants it to mean is worthless. -- U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]