On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 10:50:01AM +0100, Stephan Lachnit wrote: > On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 8:15 AM Andreas Tille <andr...@an3as.eu> wrote: > > > > However, my point was that I want to know what policy ftpmaster applies > > to new binary names and to focus on this topic. I really want to know > > that policy of ftpmaster and I really would like to see that documented > > and I'm afraid that thread is drifting away from the original topic > > that I will not get any answer on this. > > > > So again: I see a conflict in my interpretation of the mail[1] (original > > posters again in CC) which suggests "an auto-approver" and what I'm > > currently observing and I would be really happy if we can document the > > policy for changed (and new) binary names of existing source packages. > > Since I feel my mail went lost in the discussion, here again my opinion:
It's not been lost, there has been lots of discussion around the lottery idea C, but in changing the email subject I believe Andreas is trying to draw the distinction between the request to document *current* practice and your subthread about possible improvements to the overall process.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
