On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Arno Töll wrote: > Hi, > > as a clarification, because I was pointed to it: > > On 13.06.2012 18:54, Arno Töll wrote: >> Drive-by sponsoring makes this even more complicated and is not helping >> anybody. We should stop advocating drive-by sponsoring at all. > > ... with the exception of evident cases like RC bug fixes, emergency > uploads or any other kind of upload where an urgent fix is needed. > > That's clearly not what I meant to address. I am merely addressing the > phenomenon of mass drive-by sponsoring of random packages. > > Yes, that happens quite regularly and I do not think this is how > sponsoring should work at all.
Is that worse than the package being completely ignored? I'm really not sure what your definition of drive-by is. Sometimes I'll make time to look at a package interesting me, I'll communicate with the sponsoree, upload it if they address my concerns, then follow it for a little while to make sure nothing bad happened. Is that a drive-by? Best wishes, Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CANTw=mpor0iogzapdsltdjhhq8v6bywgnsg4p4pzeqkhfdd...@mail.gmail.com
