Future of REVU and Debian Mentors

Sarah Hobbs hobbsee at kubuntu.org
Mon Jul 30 14:12:52 BST 2007


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Charlie wrote:
> Speed is only realized if a MOTU is *willing* to review your package.
> If not it will just set there, and set there and set there.  As a
> matter of fact I have a package in REVU right now and the last MOTU
> comment is dated July 10.  And while I am up on my soap box, REVU days
> are a joke, I have begged and begged and begged MOTU's to review my
> package on what are suppose to be REVU days, like I said above the
> last MOTU comment on my package is July 10.  So to sum up Ubuntu's
> REVU way of doing things is not any better or any worse than Debian's
> mail only way of doing things.

I think this is a very valid point.  A lot of the current MOTU's know
that the majority of uploads on REVU aren't ready for uploading - hence,
don't want to "waste their time", so to speak, on commenting, etc, when
often the original person doesn't come back anyway.

If you spend an hour on REVU, commenting people's uploads, finding
people didn't test build (I had a package that failed to build *7*
times, once), finding people didn't read the documentation (incorrect
version numbers are the most obvious here!), and, at the end of it, got
to upload nothing, there's relatively little point in doing so, compared
to doing other more fruitful things.

Most of the current MOTU's are not employed by Canonical, or any other
company to work on Ubuntu - hence they have every right to work on the
things that they want to - which often is with things that seem more
worthwhile, whether that be their own things that they want to see in
universe, or the patch sponsorship queue.

I'd question why we're encouraging our hopefuls to put in new packages,
when for the majority of them don't care for what they're packaging -
they're only doing it for the experience - which means that they wont
update the package, and in the next release (or sooner) it'll sit in the
archive and rot, as no one cares about it.

I'd prefer to see people fixing bugs in *existing* packages.  The
sponsorship queue is shorter, and it benefits more people.  When we have
a huge number of bugs in universe, I cant see the point of adding more
packages with bugs, which the original hopefuls won't fix, as they only
did it for experience sake.

Hobbsee
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGrePU7/o1b30rzoURAuOkAKCN0/zcvCWcjEc5By0sIo88d84+cwCfe8Hq
X25ZaZG9vJmNCgS5CYL5U9o=
=HSeu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the Ubuntu-motu mailing list