Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> || On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 22:56:20 +0100
> || Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> Why not automate the NEW queue for packages with prior source versions
>>> in the archive? Worst case ftp-master has to remove a deb with silly
>>> name from archive and kick the DD for it.
>>>
>>> Correct me if I'm wrong.
>
> bfaf> I think you're right. There is always way to remove wrong packages, and
> bfaf> developer which uploaded it could be warned if that case.
> bfaf> It's still better than waiting for approval for a month, like it is
> already.
>
> It can have bad implications on user side. If ftp-master remove a
> package of sid, for example, we can have users using the previous
> 'silly name' and then it will not be upgraded. Otherwise if maintainer
> include a Replaces, bla bla bla in control. But this will not be true
> for every silly named package.
Then the maintainer gets a bugreport saying they should
Replace/Conflict/Provide the silly name. Also ftp-mster could get an
automatic notice about new debs and a 3 day window to veto it or
something. ftp-master being a group that should suffice. The NEW queue
doesn't have to be instantanious.
How often does it actualy happen that ftp-master rejects the name of a
package? Did anyone have that happen to him/her when adding a new deb
to old source ever?
MfG
Goswin
PS: kernel-image-2.6.8-amd64 (which has a security fix for sarge iirc)
is still stuck in NEW. Thats the sort of package automation would
help.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
