On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 02:27:42PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jul 2010, Hector Oron wrote: > > 2010/7/13, Russ Allbery <r...@debian.org>: > > > But if those steps fail and it gets to the point where I'm actively asking > > > for help, my customary experience has been to never get any reply. Mail > > > seems to just disappear into a black hole. Sometimes this is true even > > > for a requeue request, although mostly those do get handled, but anything > > > asking for more details seems to rarely get any reply. > > > > We are persons, and mail stack grows fast. So, suggested use of BTS > > should be encouraged. Tagging packages for porters to have a look > > might be a really good idea. > > If porters would like psuedopackages for their architecture to track > requests, that can be arranged. [Y'all just need to ask, point me at > some bugs which should be assigned to them, tell me the maintainer > address, and provide the blurb that goes on > http://www.debian.org/Bugs/pseudo-packages.] >
While I agree it should go through the BTS, I am not sure pseudo-packages are the best for that. In most cases fixing a porting issue is not the responsibility of the maintainer nor the porter, but both together. With pseudo-packages it will end-up as bugs reassigned to the pseudo-packages (to the porters), with the maintainers being satisfied of having one bug less to care. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100713213632.gj18...@hall.aurel32.net