Pending Packages List, 2004-03-13
Christopher Faylor
cgf-no-personal-reply-please@cygwin.com
Mon Mar 15 19:12:00 GMT 2004
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 01:59:58PM -0500, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
>Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>|I'd like to propose that if someone's ITP'd package has outstanding
>|issues, that someone cannot ITP any new packages until either the issues
>|are addressed or the package is withdrawn.
>
>I understand your thinking, but remember when I needed to ITP help2man
>in order to resolve my problems with gtypist? May I suggest instead to
>make a limit to how many concurrent pending ITPs that someone may have,
>perhaps 5. I think a better solution, not just for this problem but to
>prevent an overload of the ITP system in general.
I don't know. I think I like Igor's more draconian approach better. I
might even go so far as to say that there should be only one ITP at a
time unless there is a demonstrated need for other interrelated
packages. So, one at a time would be the rule and you'd have to wait to
get the package entirely through the cycle before offering up another
package.
I am wondering if we should have some different voting rules, too. I
have previously gone on record as thinking that the three vote rule is
too easy. Maybe we need a representative council or something.
cgf
More information about the Cygwin-apps
mailing list