[csw-maintainers] Our core values: providing straightforward experience to the user

[Dagobert Michelsen]

Hi,

Am 24.11.2010 um 18:12 schrieb Philip Brown:
> On 11/23/10, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> No dia 20 de Novembro de 2010 19:46, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com>
>> escreveu:
>>> (I will point out that this is EXACTLY what Peter proposed: no-one
>>> other than the maintainer would directly examine them before release,
>> 
>> Yes and no.  No one other than the maintainer would _have_ to directly
>> examine packages before putting the package into unstable.  However,
>> the maintainer could ask another maintainer for a review of his package.
> 
> This is what I mean by "[something that works in the real world]".
> In the "Real World", almost no maintainer asks someone else for a
> review before releasing their package.
> 
> So your, and Peter's proposal, will effectively result in packages
> getting directly released without any 3rd party review, for pretty
> much all future packages.
> 
> 
>> I think it was about a release to unstable, rather than current.
> 
> Err.. unstable IS current.
> Maybe you mean experimental. But what is your proposal of migrating
> packages from experimental to current?

There are two different things producing "quality": manual inspection
and realworld usage. I could imagine a first-step trial for brave
users with feedback and a second-step inspection to go to the next more stable
release level.

>> You're probably still thinking in the old model, while many people
>> already think in terms of staged package catalogs.
>> 
>> I don't think that the goal of providing high quality packages is
>> contradictory with the idea of human-free release process.
> 
> People have only to check through the now public pkgsubmissions
> archives, to see proof that this is false.
> Many problems with packages have been caught by the existing release
> process, that would not have been caught by a method of "only
> maintainer looks at it".
> You will probably reply by, "well users can always file a bug", to
> which my reply is,
> "users very rarely file bugs. it is more common for users to simply
> stop using the package and look elsewhere".
> 
> I dont know about your definition of "high quality packages", but
> "maintainer releases what is 'good enough for them', and no-one else
> looks at it", definately does not fit my definition of it.

Right, no maintainer however experienced is proof of making stupid
mistakes (like me...)


Best regards

  -- Dago