[csw-maintainers] Release process for current (was: Re: Thematics month proposal)

[Sebastian Kayser]

Peter Bonivart wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:14 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
>> I dont think that playing games like that is beneficial to the quality of
>> CSW packages. But that seems to be what Peter is aiming for, since the
>> other cases are Already Handled.
> 
> I wouldn't call disclosing the process and sharing the load playing
> games but it's nice to hear your view of it.
> 
>> In my opinion, it would be a bad thing, to have one set of packages that
>> are put into "current"  via one person, that have strict consistency to them,
>> and then have another set of packages, allowed to go into current
>> by a different person, that did not have consistency to them.
> 
> There's really no defence to your single of point of failure strategy.
> You're just getting desperate and now you're insulting anyone wanting
> to help even before they get a chance. Do you really think that no one
> can do what you do? Blastwave does fine without your help, I have made
> an alternative to pkg-get and Dago basically does what you when it
> comes to the current versus testing repos. You're defending your
> position with secrecy and discrediting.

Just some questions, because i have never been in the position and i
would like to understand the discussion: Has the release process with
Phil as the single point of getting packages into current shown a major
bottleneck so far? Or is it the manual nature (effort on the maintainers
side) of the release process?

Did packages get rejected out of uncertain or non-understandable
reasons? Do we have a truck factor issue with Phil as the only path to
current at the moment? What's the exact pain that is trying to be cured?

Sebastian