On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 02:08:04AM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: > 1. While there are sponsors that prefer branches over debdiffs/source > packages uploaded somewhere, I don't know of any that will only sponsor > branches. The reverse is not true. There are developers that don't do > UDD sponsoring. By pursuing this path, new packagers limit the potential > candidates to sponsor packages.
If there is a consensus that new packagers should be using UDD, we shouldn't let that consensus be held hostage by dissenters that refuse to use UDD. But as per my previous message, I agree that UDD reliability here is a major problem, and no one is well served by developer documentation describing a non-existent utopia instead of the way things actually are. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [email protected] [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
