On 9 June 2011 03:15, Michael Scherer <m...@zarb.org> wrote: > Le jeudi 09 juin 2011 à 02:40 +0300, Ahmad Samir a écrit : > >> Yes, but I was talking about the actual submitting to */release, not >> fixing the package itself. IIUC the submission rights will be >> restricted to the Sec team. > > Sorry to be picky, but there is no submit to */release, it is frozen.
I meant */updates, it's a typo. [..] > And in my proposition, there is also no submit to */update, there is a > move from */updates_testing. > > So for managing the submit to updates_testing and the whole process, I > think it should be open to any packagers. It should be maintainers > responsibility to do the update ( prepare, do a test build, check, > submit ), even if secteam members could be proactive for that. But the > process should not be restricted to them, or it will not scale ( and > given we want to have bugfixes updates, it wouldn't make much sense to > call the team like this ). > A balance between leaving it open for all, and not restricting it too much so as not to make updating take more time, is needed, I think. > Since ensuring that a update is a minimal change is (to me) a quality > issue, I propose to add to the QA list of things to check before > refusing a update : > "it doesn't fullfill the requirement of minimal changes ( with > exceptions" > > But that requires QA people to have minimal packaging notions, which > could be a problem :/ > > Again, nothing prevent people from the secteam to also be part of the QA > team. > -- > Michael Scherer > > -- Ahmad Samir