| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I'm open to all input, but here's some initial questions I'd like to |
| 4 |
> hear your answers to: |
| 5 |
> - How should developers, herds & teams communicate how welcome they |
| 6 |
> are to NMU changes on their packages? |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
The way I've been doing this is: |
| 9 |
- packages I maintain through herd -> go ahead and be responsible. |
| 10 |
- if I add myself explicitly in metadata.xml this means I prefer at |
| 11 |
least reviewing every change that gets in (with some exceptions for |
| 12 |
trivial changes, like e.g. qt moving category) |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
[...] |
| 15 |
> - How do we encourage responsible ownership of changes that cause |
| 16 |
> breakage? [1] |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
That's something I'd like to get enlightened on. The, probably too |
| 19 |
emotional, algorithm that doesn't scale I've been applying has been: |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
1. ask the committer to fix the problem |
| 22 |
2. wait |
| 23 |
3. if no fix comes in a timely manner, fix it myself, be clear that I've |
| 24 |
not liked it at all. Be a bit less polite in future steps 1. with |
| 25 |
said developer. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Alexis. |
Archives