Benjamin Drung <[email protected]> wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 15.03.2011, 20:39 +0000 schrieb Chris Coulson: > The normal
process is to subscribe ubuntu-sponsors. There's really no > need to convert it
to a debdiff though, although some sponsors will > request this for some
reason. I'm not sure why though, as adding a > changelog entry takes an
additional 10 - 20 seconds on top of the time > that the sponsor should be
spending on reviewing and testing the change > before they upload. > > This
culture of rejecting anything good that doesn't have a debdiff > needs to stop,
as it's completely frustrating for contributors. There are two types of
contributors: prospective Ubuntu developers and drive-by contributors. For the
former it is perfectly ok to request a debdiff. They need to learn the tools.
For the latter it is too much overhead. The argument for having a debdiff: In a
debdiff you have a real name and an email address. The patch author gets the
credits. -- Benjamin Drung Debian & Ubuntu Developer -- Ubuntu-motu mai
ling
list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
That or the sponsor spends another 30 with their editor and gives the patch
author credit.
Scott K
--
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
[email protected]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
