On 12/21/2010 10:33 AM, Tatu Lahtela wrote:
> On 12/21/2010 10:19 AM, ext Carsten Munk wrote:
>> 2010/12/21 Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>>
>>
>>     On 12/20/2010 9:53 PM, Kangkai Yin wrote:
>>
>>         Hi,
>>         Adding new package kernel-adaptation-oaktrail in project
>>         Trunk:Testing. Please review and accept ASAP.
>>
>>         Justification for this new package:
>>
>>         The kernel for Oaktrail, fix #BMC 11588
>>
>>
>>
>>     ok this is getting silly
>>
>>     opening dummy bugs just to get past the paperwork, just so you can
>>     claim you "fixed" a bug...
>>
>>     our bureaucrazy has gone waaaay too far.
>>
>>     We're in a development window, not in a "code freeze strict
>>     bugfixes only" part of the schedule!
>>
>> Well, and we're side-stepping program management totally by having
>> those dummy bugs. A new package should be a FEA# and approved by
>> program management as per
>> http://wiki.meego.com/Release_Engineering/Process#Package_quality_expectations_for_submissions_into_.2A:Testing_projects
>>
>> Either we start enforcing it for everything or we have to modify the
>> rules to fit reality... Proposals welcome?
>
> So what was missing from this submission, the ACCEPTED stat? Without
> snake oiling (i.e. calling/msging the prog managers) it can take weeks
> to have it.

What was missing was that basically nobody else but the package sender 
was informed of the upcoming package before it was actually sent to 
Trunk:Testing.

With Feature requests, the additions are more clearly
planned (and that process perhaps needs some kind of a speedup).

But having that is still better than a bug-avalanche for
inflowing packages people are submitting without asking anyone.

BR,
Topi


>
>
> --
> Tatu
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-packaging mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-packaging

Reply via email to