Hi Lars, On 11/8/26 15:23, Lars Uffmann wrote:
Simon, Maytham,*ahum* On 2026-11-08 20:09:45, Simon Quigley wrote:There's also another argument to be made about the age of the bugs. It would be one thing if there was a recommendation not to sponsor from one DD and another DD did it anyway. On the other hand, for these bugs, *none* of the DDs interested in sponsoring packages have picked them up, recommendation against or not. That should speak for something. I'm absolutely +1 on closing the bugs that are older than a few months at this point, if they match the criteria of self-authored. The downside to automatically closing those old bugs is that we might actually miss a valid one, so should be handled manually.As someone whose RFS is several months old by now, who has actively sought reviewers, gotten reviews, implemented reviewer comments and is currently ~1 month waiting for a potential sponsor feedback after 2 months with no sponsors, I'd very much appreciate if you took the time to manually close RFS issues to see which ones have had the uploader put serious effort in.
Yeah, once we triage the valid ones versus the ones that are very unlikely to be sponsored, it'll be much easier for someone to spend some time going through these. Right now it's just difficult to sort through. If someone emails me directly looking for a specific package review, it's likely I'll get back to them. Lars, you're welcome to do that. I'm sorry your experience hasn't been ideal, and I'd encourage you to keep at it. Unfortunately, you're certainly not the only person reading this list with this issue, so while I'd be happy to respond to direct emails, at some point it would be good to have the kind of triage we're discussing. You could also ask on #debian-mentors on OFTC (which I'm admittedly less active on) as well, I see reviews happening there often. Best regards, Simon Quigley [email protected]
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
