[Openstack-devel] nova_2013.1-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
zigo at debian.org
Thu Apr 11 02:52:58 UTC 2013
On 04/11/2013 06:04 AM, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> On 13177 March 1977, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> Again, you aren't supposed to do this kind of technical review. It also
>> clearly shows that you don't understand how OpenStack works, which is to
>> be expected: I don't expect the FTP masters to understand every single
>> package in the archive, and certainly not something with the complexity
>> of OpenStack). In this case, yes, we really need multiple packages,
>> since each of them is carrying a daemon and its associated service, as
>> JD explained.
> Oh yes, we so are supposed to do that. That you don't like it is a
> different thing. Adding lots of tiny packages where the metadata has
> more size than the actual use data of the package is bad enough that it
> warrants a reject. Independent of our knowledge of the package -
> thats why you can just explain stuff if its really needed.
I'm not sure I get it. Please confirm that I really understand it.
Are you saying that, with your FTP master hat on, you continue in this
direction, and will not approve Nova in the NEW queue, unless I decided
to agree with your view, and reduce the number of binary packages?
More information about the Openstack-devel