[arch-dev-public] signoffs are dead

Bartłomiej Piotrowski bpiotrowski at archlinux.org
Mon Jul 4 19:36:18 UTC 2016

On 2016-07-04 07:19, Florian Pritz via arch-dev-public wrote:
> 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

Sure, I'm not trying to discredit the idea, I am always for bringing
more people into Arch. Explicit feedback that something works is indeed
better than silence. My point is, my packages rarely receive any
signoffs, so I need to do smoke tests with some common scenarios anyway.

If there is interest and archweb allows us for tester role, let's do it.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 510 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/attachments/20160704/f91f9b53/attachment.asc>

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list