multiple uploaders

[Ross Gammon]

On 05/31/2015 02:58 PM, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> Well, it really boils down what we want the team's reputation to be.
> The rule tests whether or not there is *team* commitment, and for that
> you need *more than one person* actively caring for a package. If a
> package fails the "two active uploaders" test, how can you argue that
> the package was "team maintained"?

Hi Reinhard,

I agree in principle. But for me, having two uploaders does not test if
there is team commitment. It just makes sure that there is more than one
person taking care of the package. And this is probably more important
for the high profile packages than for some of the more obscure ones. I
think it also helps prevent a new team member getting something
sponsored into the team, and then running away.

If someone suggests a new package is brought into the team, and it is
accepted, then the team is making a commitment at that point.

When a package gets behind, it is usually because the uploader(s) is/are
a bit busy. The team should notice this on the QA page/dashboard and
ping the uploader(s) on the list to see what the problem is.

If they are temporarily busy, maybe they would be happy with a "Team
Upload" by someone else?

This is not meant to be a rant, it is just how I have observed some of
the other packaging teams operating in Debian.

Can I suggest that for new packages:
1. the one intending to ITP asks if the team are happy to bring in the
new package
2. there is an "attempt" to find someone else to also love the package?

I would be happy to try and draft a tweak to the policy if there was
consensus (including some guidelines).

Cheers,

Ross

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/attachments/20150531/2c52d574/attachment.sig>