From: otto@debian.org 
  
 Hi, 
  
 For the record, devscripts is green again thanks to Yadd's fix about 
 1h after I my email noting it: 
 https://salsa.debian.org/debian/devscripts/-/commits/main 
  
 > I did in fact look at CI (and also ran autopkgtest and saw a failure). 
 > 
 > But I judged that I should upload anyway, given the inconsistent state 
 > sid was in wrt the transition I was working on. 
  
 I think it would have been better if you had held off the upload. It 
 wasn't such an urgent "production issue" that you could not have had a 
 pause for some hours or half a day. 
  
 Instead of just uploading, you could have raised the issue of 
 autopkgtest being broken and waited to see whether Yadd has time to 
 fix it immediately or not. As we can see in hindsight, he fixed it in 
 an hour from my email. Intentionally uploading broken stuff would only 
 be motivated if there was some effort to fix it first and the 
 conclusion that "we can't wait more" came after actually spending at 
 least a half day waiting. I earlier also sent you an email with the 
 list of commits missing from the changelog, which you then chose not 
 to incorporate into your final changelog update, and I sent a private 
 email to you asking to hold off the upload until devscripts is fixed 
 but seems that arrived 15 minutes late. If you had waited for one 
 extra hour, both the autopgktest and changelog would likely have been 
 fixed and the upload correct. 
  
 Also, we could have avoided this in the first place if more people in 
 the past 3 days had sent their submissions to devscripts as Merge 
 Requests instead of pushing directly to main. 
  
 Many people here seem to rehash the argument that they should be 
 allowed to do whatever they want and trust their own judgment. My 
 argument is that people don't make mistakes intentionally, and using 
 "judgment" to have things reviewed and tested *only* when the 
 submitter suspects there could be a mistake is going to miss most of 
 the cases when people do accidental mistakes. Another argument that 
 gets repeated here is that people don't want to spend time on waiting 
 for tests or reviews because of the increased cost. Yes - there is 
 some extra effort required upfront, but there are also savings from 
 avoiding mistakes that affect the whole archive. Waiting for CI to 
 pass or for another person to check out your change and approve it 
 will slow you down a bit, but if you don't do it, you may risk slowing 
 down tens of other people who tried to do something else and then got 
 affected by the mistake. Your workflow decision is not fully your own 
 personal decision, but it has consequences for other people too, in 
 particular when working on a package like devscripts. 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)