Hi, On Sun, 20 Sep 2009, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > > As a package maintainer, I will do my best to help the Debian project > > release a stable version of our operating system. In particular, I will > > work together with the release team and I will keep all packages > > associated to my name free of release critical bugs. > > I'd rephrase this last sentence as "... and I will do my best to keep > all packages ...". IOW you should ask applicants to state their > "guarantee of invested efforts" rather than "guarantee of result" > (nobody can give the latter, everybody should give the former).
Ok. > Beside the above wording remark, I've a problem with the first part of > the pledge: it is too limited in scope. It's intended. As I said it must apply to all package maintainers (DM as well, not only future DD). > The Release Team, routinely before releases, complaints (rightful!) that > too few people work on RC bug which are not "theirs". The current NM > process, IMHO, does not stress enough the fact that being a DD is also > about something more than your own packages. If all DD/DM applied what this pledge says, we would not have to rely so much on having DD fixing someone else's package. > I would add to the pledge a statement that, once your packages are in > good condition, you should look forward to fix RC bugs in other > packages. If we agree that this should be part of the pledge text, I can > draft a corresponding sentence. I don't think it's a good idea. And it would only be acceptable for DD, and not all DD agree with this. I want this pledge to be uncontroversial so that its message remains clear and effective. On Sun, 20 Sep 2009, Michael Banck wrote: > To be honest, I think it goes into way too much detail about how RC bugs > should get handled. Of course, RC bugs are important, but if we > introduce something like this, it seems a bit blown out of proportion. Well, I drafted it precisely because I'm annoyed of having so many maintainers ignore their RC bugs. > What about trying to work gracefully with other members of the Debian > community, as well as upstream and downstream developers? What about > treating our users respectfully? What about striving to be excellent in > your packaging? If you find a wording for those points that is acceptable to everybody then I'm fine to incorporate those but I fear it will be difficult. As I stated, I want this text to be the minimal set of expectations that we all agree on. > If we are just worried about RC bugs (or RC bugs as result of overworked > developers), I think we can handle this just fine right now (NMUs > followed by forced orphaning from QA in coordination with the DAM). I think the graphs show clearly that we don't. Having so many NMU and force orphan by the QA team is a sign of failure of the current maintainers. I want to avoid that as much as possible in the future. (The key distinction for me is pro-active vs reactive) Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
