NEW Packages process

Daniel Holbach daniel.holbach at
Wed Apr 16 13:15:07 BST 2008

Hash: SHA1

Stefan Potyra schrieb:
> No, I very much doubt that actually. Once a package leaves revu, usually 
> packaging bugs are not fixed afterwards (contrary to application bugs). From 
> the very early days I can recall one example, where I used to heavily insist 
> on man pages for each binary, and once made an exception right before 
> FeatureFreeze. I've even filed bugs after uploading, which are unfortunately 
> still open.

I have seen lots of sponsoring bugs where the examples I mentioned
(watch file, Standards-Version, Homepage field, etc.) were fixed
alongside package updates and so on.

> Oh, and imho reviewing doesn't only serve the purpose of getting new packages 
> in, but much more about teaching people about packaging. I doubt that the 
> sponsoring workflow for existing packages will have the same effect. (In the 
> few times I sponsor existing packages, I don't do packaging reviews, but only 
> review a given change to a package... I could imagine other people to do the 
> same).

I personally ask and have seen others actively asking for changes to
patches if they were not ready to go yet. (Be it packaging problems,
policy problems or not adhering to processes.)

Have a nice day,

- --
My 5 today: #210449 (network-manager-applet), #215043, #193764
(evolution-scalix), #215472 (gnome-themes-extras), #205756 (gnome-
Do 5 a day - every day!
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -


More information about the Ubuntu-motu mailing list