Hi Tobias, On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 02:34:37PM +0200, Tobias Hansen wrote: > Hi Andreas, > > teams that use the PET [1] use this flag to distinguish packages that > are still worked on (UNRELEASED) and packages where the maintainer > searches a sponsor (unstable/experimental). The PET uses this to > determine whether to display the package as ready for upload or not [2]. > In teams that strictly use this workflow (I think the Perl Team is one > of them) it is not necessary to ask for a sponsor on the list. > > The fact that the package was uploaded is then indicated in the vcs by > the debian revision tag which is created by the sponsor. > > [1] http://pet.alioth.debian.org/
Unfortunately this list is desperately outdated (I know for sure that PET does not work for Debian Med any more since the last PET rewrite :-() > [2] http://pet.debian.net/pkg-perl/pet.cgi > > One can of course do it differently, but this is why I considered > removing UNRELEASED when one is ready a standard practice. I agree that this workflow has some advantages *IF* PET is used and I would really welcome if we could implement PET for Debian Science as well (any volunteer??) Do you know what method is used if the sponsor finds some things the sponsee needs to change? Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
