I think the suggestion of randomized spot checking is meant to replace - not 
add - to the present system of checking that penalizes uploads of existing 
source but new binaries.  So human resources should not be the issue. 

I would imagine that the packages currently being selected are not arbitrary -  
they are weighted towards library code.  Is that fair to say? 

On March 7, 2018 12:02:10 AM CST, Chris Lamb <la...@debian.org> wrote:
>Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
>> > > I know for a fact that quite regularly licence checks on binNEW
>> > > causes RC bugs to pop up.  I acknowledge it may be a burder for
>the ftp
>> > > team, but that reason alone probably deserves to keep binNEW as
>it is.
>> > 
>> > That would seem to justify some sort of randomized spot checks [..]
>> Exactly.
>Whilst it does seem a little odd, there is some merit the current
>where packages get essentially-arbitrary chosen for a cursory glance by
>member the FTP team.
>The team is already rather time-limited so an expectation of
>of random packages already in the archive seems a little optimistic.
>(Identifying various types of NEWness might still be marginally useful
>categorising new.html and similar interfaces, mind you.)
>      ,''`.
>     : :'  :     Chris Lamb
>     `. `'`      la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
>       `-

Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Reply via email to