Web lists-archives.com

Re: A proposal for improving transparency of the FTP NEW process




On Fri, 2018-03-02 at 13:00 +0100, Gert Wollny wrote:
> as the one who is the uploader of the package that is currently longest
> in the NEW pipeline (vtk7), I'd like to make a proposal how
> transparency and also the interaction from non ftp-master members to
> review packages could be improved.

I'm not involved with the ftp master team in any way, except I
occasionally make them do work by uploading things that go to thew NEW
queue. In the past decade ago, the NEW processing has almost always
been fast, and when it hasn't, it's been due to issues like a Debian
release happening.

I assume that the reason my packages have been processed is due to one
of two reasons: a) I get quoted on LWN several times a year, so I'm a
celebrity and get special treatment or b) I take care to make my
packages easy to review. I've had a couple of rejections, and those
were clear bugs, and after I fixed them, the re-review went fast.

> Short version: Use the salsa per-package issue tracker for problems
> that come up with the review in NEW.

Counter proposal: let's work on ways in which uploaders can make it
easy and quick for ftp masters to review packages in NEW. The idea
should be, in my opinion, that any package that requires more than a
day of work to review should be rejected by default.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part