On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 08:27:22AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > Actually, the counter-argument is that we don't want to make it > *harder* to do a QA upload.
That was not the counter-argument back then [1], it might be a new / different counter-argument. [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-qa/2007/08/msg00073.html > Currently, it's "apt-get source ; make change ; > dput". If we used a VCS, we would have to create: > - a process to auto-import orphaned packages into the VCS > - procedures to commit changes to VCS before doing QA uploads > > I don't have numbers about that, but a fair share of QA uploads are done > by one- or two-timers, even a majority of uploads is done by QA folks. > We don't want to make it harder for those one-timers to improve the > status of orphaned packages. Frankly, I don't buy this. Nowadays everybody should be able to work with common $VCS. But even when this is not the case, $VCSs are always unofficial wrt the archive: it is not *mandatory* to use them, even for normal (non-QA) NMUs. So even checking in orphaned packages in $VCS does not make it harder to do a QA upload. If you want to use it: fine, otherwise you can always upload the "old" way. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7 z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/ Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature