On 04.07.2016 06:37, Bartłomiej Piotrowski wrote:
I don't see how it makes signoffs useless. Instead of "works for me", I got "something is broken" message either via bug tracker or IRC/e-mail. The result is the same – the package is fixed or pulled out from testing.
Sure, we don't need signoffs for that. Signoff are intended to show the maintainer that people have tested their package and that it worked for them. Without a signoff all you can do is wait and if you don't hear anything that can either mean that there are no problems or that nobody had enough time to test the package yet. Signoffs thus provide the explicit positive feedback that you can't get any other way. I think explicit positive feedback is much better than implicit timeouts. I really wouldn't know how much time people need to test stuff and even if you ask them, they might just be busy, on vacation or just sick. Also as you can see, apparently the current testers (devs/TUs) don't do as much testing as they used to, but how would you know that if there were no signoffs to begin with? Florian