Hi, Am 24.11.2010 um 18:12 schrieb Philip Brown: > On 11/23/10, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski <[email protected]> wrote: >> No dia 20 de Novembro de 2010 19:46, Philip Brown <[email protected]> >> escreveu: >>> (I will point out that this is EXACTLY what Peter proposed: no-one >>> other than the maintainer would directly examine them before release, >> >> Yes and no. No one other than the maintainer would _have_ to directly >> examine packages before putting the package into unstable. However, >> the maintainer could ask another maintainer for a review of his package. > > This is what I mean by "[something that works in the real world]". > In the "Real World", almost no maintainer asks someone else for a > review before releasing their package. > > So your, and Peter's proposal, will effectively result in packages > getting directly released without any 3rd party review, for pretty > much all future packages. > > >> I think it was about a release to unstable, rather than current. > > Err.. unstable IS current. > Maybe you mean experimental. But what is your proposal of migrating > packages from experimental to current?
There are two different things producing "quality": manual inspection and realworld usage. I could imagine a first-step trial for brave users with feedback and a second-step inspection to go to the next more stable release level. >> You're probably still thinking in the old model, while many people >> already think in terms of staged package catalogs. >> >> I don't think that the goal of providing high quality packages is >> contradictory with the idea of human-free release process. > > People have only to check through the now public pkgsubmissions > archives, to see proof that this is false. > Many problems with packages have been caught by the existing release > process, that would not have been caught by a method of "only > maintainer looks at it". > You will probably reply by, "well users can always file a bug", to > which my reply is, > "users very rarely file bugs. it is more common for users to simply > stop using the package and look elsewhere". > > I dont know about your definition of "high quality packages", but > "maintainer releases what is 'good enough for them', and no-one else > looks at it", definately does not fit my definition of it. Right, no maintainer however experienced is proof of making stupid mistakes (like me...) Best regards -- Dago _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
