FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 12-03-2008, 12:00 PM
Romain Beauxis
 
Default NEW processing

Le Wednesday 03 December 2008 13:34:06 Lucas Nussbaum, vous avez écrit*:
> That's not true. We imposed that reviewing step to ourselves, and, if
> it's doing more harm (by slowing down development and annoying
> contributors) than good (by detecting mistakes and improving Debian's
> overall quality), we could simply decide to drop it. (or to drop it
> partially, for some categories of uploads).
>
> It's funny how in Debian, we always prefer to add more checks (which
> always let some things get thought while they shouldn't) rather than
> trusting developers to do the right thing. It's similar to what happened
> to the NM process.

Although it adds some lag, I strongly believe it detects a lot of mistakes and
it still has its interest. The mistakes they detected from my packages really
needed to be fixed. I thank the ftp-masters for detecting them. And wait for
the delay.

Yes, sometimes their decisions are questionable, but the overall interest of
the NEW queue shouldn't be an issue.

And I don't think I am really worse than the average packaging quality


Romain


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-03-2008, 12:29 PM
Lucas Nussbaum
 
Default NEW processing

On 03/12/08 at 13:56 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net> (03/12/2008):
> > That's not true. We imposed that reviewing step to ourselves, and, if
> > it's doing more harm (by slowing down development and annoying
> > contributors) than good (by detecting mistakes and improving Debian's
> > overall quality), we could simply decide to drop it. (or to drop it
> > partially, for some categories of uploads).
>
> How do you see the legalese aspect? In the harm or good box?

I don't think that we should drop the legal review (that would probably
be dangerous). However, NEW reviews seem to cover a lot of other
aspects currently, which might explain why it takes so much time.

If people feel that a reviewing service is needed, we could split
that out of NEW processing and have a separate service (or just use
debian-mentors@ and http://mentors.debian.net).

> > always let some things get thought while they shouldn't) rather than
> ^^^^^^^
> through?
yes
--
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |
 
Old 12-03-2008, 12:36 PM
"Miriam Ruiz"
 
Default NEW processing

2008/12/3 Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net>:

> I don't think that we should drop the legal review (that would probably
> be dangerous). However, NEW reviews seem to cover a lot of other
> aspects currently, which might explain why it takes so much time.
>
> If people feel that a reviewing service is needed, we could split
> that out of NEW processing and have a separate service (or just use
> debian-mentors@ and http://mentors.debian.net).

Yup, I agree with you. I think that makes sense.

Greetings,
Miry


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-03-2008, 12:41 PM
Kalle Kivimaa
 
Default NEW processing

Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net> writes:
> I don't think that we should drop the legal review (that would probably
> be dangerous). However, NEW reviews seem to cover a lot of other
> aspects currently, which might explain why it takes so much time.

These things are the major slowdowns, at least for me, when doing NEW
processing:

- package contains files under different license
- package contains files with differing copyright headers
- package has many copyright holders and these differ randomly between
files
- package has a large directory hierarchy

If you have a package with a single license, a handful of copyright
holders and identical copyright headers in every file with a flat
source hierarchy, scanning through the package is pretty fast. Then,
if you've also made sure that you don't get any lintian warnings and
your debian-directory is clear (especially debian/rules), the whole
process is pretty painless.

--
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P) *
* PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer *


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-03-2008, 12:44 PM
Mark Brown
 
Default NEW processing

On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 03:41:29PM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net> writes:

> > I don't think that we should drop the legal review (that would probably
> > be dangerous). However, NEW reviews seem to cover a lot of other
> > aspects currently, which might explain why it takes so much time.

> These things are the major slowdowns, at least for me, when doing NEW
> processing:

I'm guessing that many of the other checks that Lucas mentions fall out
of the examination you have to do for the licensing anyway?

--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-03-2008, 12:45 PM
Holger Levsen
 
Default NEW processing

Hi,

On Wednesday 03 December 2008 14:29, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> I don't think that we should drop the legal review (that would probably
> be dangerous). However, NEW reviews seem to cover a lot of other
> aspects currently, which might explain why it takes so much time.

I'm very happy about the additional checks the ftpteam does. If people want a
faster crappy distribution, there are options, no need to turn Debian into
that.


regards,
Holger
 
Old 12-03-2008, 12:59 PM
Lucas Nussbaum
 
Default NEW processing

On 03/12/08 at 14:45 +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wednesday 03 December 2008 14:29, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > I don't think that we should drop the legal review (that would probably
> > be dangerous). However, NEW reviews seem to cover a lot of other
> > aspects currently, which might explain why it takes so much time.
>
> I'm very happy about the additional checks the ftpteam does. If people want a
> faster crappy distribution, there are options, no need to turn Debian into
> that.

Then maybe we should consider all bugs with severity >= normal as
release-critical, and not release until they are all fixed?

We have to draw the line somewhere. When people are regularly annoyed by
delays in some part of debian, maybe it's because we should move the
line slightly.

Most of our users would probably agree to trade a small amount of
quality with faster packaging of new versions, and more timely releases.
Also, we are all volunteers, it's important to keep the "fun" factor
high in Debian, or people will just get bored of contributing to Debian.
--
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-03-2008, 01:00 PM
Lucas Nussbaum
 
Default NEW processing

On 03/12/08 at 15:41 +0200, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net> writes:
> > I don't think that we should drop the legal review (that would probably
> > be dangerous). However, NEW reviews seem to cover a lot of other
> > aspects currently, which might explain why it takes so much time.
>
> These things are the major slowdowns, at least for me, when doing NEW
> processing:
>
> - package contains files under different license
> - package contains files with differing copyright headers
> - package has many copyright holders and these differ randomly between
> files
> - package has a large directory hierarchy
>
> If you have a package with a single license, a handful of copyright
> holders and identical copyright headers in every file with a flat
> source hierarchy, scanning through the package is pretty fast.

Sounds completely logical.

> Then,
> if you've also made sure that you don't get any lintian warnings and
> your debian-directory is clear (especially debian/rules), the whole
> process is pretty painless.

Why is that relevant?
--
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-03-2008, 01:04 PM
Cyril Brulebois
 
Default NEW processing

Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net> (03/12/2008):
> We have to draw the line somewhere. When people are regularly annoyed
> by delays in some part of debian, maybe it's because we should move
> the line slightly.
>
> Most of our users would probably agree to trade a small amount of
> quality with faster packaging of new versions, and more timely
> releases.

Clearly, let's release at fixed dates, every 6 months.

Mraw,
KiBi.
 
Old 12-03-2008, 01:10 PM
Kalle Kivimaa
 
Default NEW processing

Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net> writes:
> On 03/12/08 at 15:41 +0200, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
>> if you've also made sure that you don't get any lintian warnings and
>> your debian-directory is clear (especially debian/rules), the whole
>> process is pretty painless.
>
> Why is that relevant?

Lintian errors are almost always an immediate REJECT, so they don't
really slow down the process. Warnings slow the process down as then
I'm required to make a judgement call as to allow the package in or
not, so I'm much happier if the packager deals with them beforehand.

debian/control and debian/copyright are the two main files for
ftpmaster checks, so having those clear and well written makes my job
faster. debian/changelog needs to have valid information, too.
debian/rules I check to make sure that it is sane - or at least looks
like sane. debian/source.lintian-overrides is always checked.

--
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P) *
* PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer *


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:23 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org