On Mo, Nov 14, 2011 at 12:05:31 (CET), Daniel Holbach wrote: > Hello, > > Am 14.11.2011 00:47, schrieb Scott Kitterman: >> On 11/12/2011 01:08 PM, Allison Randal wrote: >>> - The suggestion from the room was to close REVU now, and change the >>> documentation to point new packagers at #ubuntu-packaging and >>> #ubuntu-motu. It's not helpful to new developers to have a site running >>> and all the documentation saying to submit their packages there, when >>> they aren't going to get help there. The IRC channels are active, and a >>> good place to get help on packaging, and to get to know the Ubuntu >>> developers who might sponsor the new package, or advise the packager to >>> submit it to Debian instead. >> >> A web based tool to support publishing and reviewing packages seems >> somewhat orthogonal to IRC channels to get help packaging. I think it's >> premature to shut down REVU until DEBEXPO is a full replacement (the >> most critical thing for me it was missing last I checked was the ability >> to give diffs of subsequent uploads of a package with the same >> version/revision. > > While it would be nice for debexpo to have a similar feature, it seems > more worrying to me that we still advertise a process that is broken and > we set wrong expectations.
What exactly are the 'wrong expectations' that are advertised to potential contributors? > Personally I'd rather like to see REVU closed, the documentation changed > and for packaging review (or general code review) any VCS be used, where > you can very easily track changes in packaging, without incrementing > packaging version numbers. Why do you think that they will be met (better?) with "any VCS"? Cheers, Reinhard -- Gruesse/greetings, Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4 -- ubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
