On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 10:45:22 +0200 Daniel Holbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >Hello everybody, > >after a recent discussion about a perceived disconnect between "main >processes" and "universe processes", I thought a bit about the process >for NEW Packages. > >Historically it was introduced to make sure that new packages are of >tip-top quality when they enter the archive. We started with 3 necessary >ACKs and changed it to 2 ACKs for non-MOTUs and encouraged MOTUs to get >an ACK from other MOTUs. I feel we've been very successful with the work >we've put into Universe and the quality of new packages. > >I propose the following changes: > 1) cut down the requirement to one ACK of a ubuntu-dev member > 2) requirement for the person who packaged the new software to become >bug contact > >These changes would have a number of benefits: > - it would cut down the review overhead and the time of waiting > - instead of a high entry barrier, have a higher emphasis on fixing >problems of packages in Universe > - higher similarity between NEW Packages process and Sponsoring process > - accredit technical skills of approved ubuntu-dev members and don't >require re-review > >I'd like to hear feedback from regular reviewers, REVU admins, our REVU >coordinator and people who contribute new packages.
There are a lot of packages that get a single advocate that still have very serious problems (particularly in copyright/licensing). I'm against dropping to a single advocate. If I were to make a change in this area I'd change it to require MOTUs get an upcheck from another MOTU instead of just suggesting it. This change would, I believe, have a significant impact on archive admin workload. They'd get a lot more packages and have to deal with more rejections and multiple reviews. In effect this would shift work from MOTU to the archive. I don't think it's a good idea. We don't have as extensive a process as Debian NM and some MOTUs do not have the breadth of experience to be the sole package reviewers. I also disagree with the idea of upload and fix it later. When the package is being developed is the best time to get it right. Scott K -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
