[csw-maintainers] introducing csw-upload-pkg

Philip Brown phil at bolthole.com
Fri May 6 23:22:47 CEST 2011


On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Wed May 04 20:43:53 -0400 2011:
>> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> >...
>> > Objections to this type of automation in the past have focused on the
>> > benefits of the human inspection that we have currently.  Nobody is
>> > disputing that having other eyes on a package is a good thing.  We
>> > hope that people will continue poking at the packages in unstable and
>> > filing bug reports.
>>
>> "hoping", never leads to good quality process.
>
> Feel free to file bugs on packages pushed to future/unstable.  This
> change will _not_ restrict the ability for humans to QA packages.  It
> just changes the handling of the QA process.
>

It seems that you missed.. or ignored... my point.
but I'll save further conversation about that, to voting time.


>> Does this translate to,, "maciej will put in any changes as soon as he
>> feels like it. They will be backed out, only if someone complains, AND
>> the board agrees to put up a vote on the issue"?
>
> Not at all.
>
>> I would suggest that this is poor quality practice, and that ALL
>> chpanges must be reviewed and approved by more than just the person
>> coding the change.  (given that, as I point out above, the code
>> becomes effectively interchangable with "policy")
>
> I think that's fair.  We already have patches flying by on devel@, we
> could move to a SoB (signed off by), AB (Acked by) model like git
> where at least two people must ok each change before it's approved.
>

And what if "at least two people" like the change, but other people do not?
Since, I repeat, this stuff becomes de-facto policy --  what
(political/policy) mechanisms are you going to put in place to
disallow "two people" to determine policy between themselves?

There will need to be some kind of auto-triggered dispute policy on
this. Otherwise,
two board members who collude, can do whatever they feel like to the
code, and block votes on issues that they personally are against.


More information about the maintainers mailing list