REVU: Automated Package Checks

Scott Kitterman ubuntu at
Fri Jan 23 01:42:12 GMT 2009

On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:25:53 -0600 Nathan Handler <nhandler at> 
>On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 6:11 PM, Scott Kitterman <ubuntu at> 
>> On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:30:29 -0600 Nathan Handler <nhandler at>
>> wrote:
>> The purposes of needs packaging bugs are to give people a way to request
>> things get packaged, to give packagers an idea what people would like to
>> see, and to make work in progress visible to avoid duplication.
>> It would be a shame to not upload a package due to lack of filling out 
>> form.  Needs packaging bus are a good idea, but to block anything due to
>> lack of one puts form over function.  Please leave this one out.
>I completely agree with you Scott. I do not feel that creating and
>closing a needs-packaging bug for a package you intend to package
>yourself serves any significant purpose. However, many wiki pages list
>a needs-packaging bug as a requirement for a new package. I am not
>sure if this requirement is an official requirement, but it is listed
>in enough wiki pages that it is treated as such. In my experience, if
>the only thing missing in a package is the closing of a
>needs-packaging bug, the package is either uploaded as-is, or the MOTU
>modifies the package to close the bug. However, I do not see anything
>wrong (if a needs-packaging bug is a real requirement) with having an
>automated check of the package when it is first uploaded that checks
>to see if it closes a needs-packaging bug. Since it happens right when
>the package is uploaded, the uploader can easily make the change. I
>feel this is very different than asking the uploader to close a
>needs-packaging bug after several months of no comments, when the rest
>of the package is good.

I think it's fine to mention, but I wouldn't want the package rejected or knocked into some 
kind of needs work state as a result.

Scott K

More information about the Ubuntu-motu mailing list