Re: O: libapache-request-perl
My apologies for jumping the gun; you haven't responded to any bugs on
your package in almost a year; others had to NMU for the 1.0 version and
the Perl 5.8.0 transition, neither of which you acknowledged. As the
package still has a maintainer I look forward to the 1.1 package.
p.s. the crack is excellent, other than its tendancy to cause momentary
lapses in judgement, thanks for asking.
On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 10:37:11PM -0700, Ron wrote:
> > > Package: wnpp
> > >
> > > Maintainer appears to be MIA - has not responded to bug reports on this
> > > package in almost one year.
> > >
> > > Orphaning this package so that someone active can take it over. I will
> > > do so if no one else is interested.
> I don't know what brand of crack they hand out in hijacking school
> these days, or much about this years fashion in diplomacy, but did
> you ever think of, uh, asking, before forcibly orphaning someone else's
> package or assuming things about them?
> This package is perfectly functional in its current form and until your
> flurry of 'activity' it had a perfectly functional maintainer keeping it
> in the archive. How do you think orphaning it and holding a fire sale
> improves on that when noone has ever asked to take it over? There is a
> big difference between active and frantic.
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 07:19:52PM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > Yup... The package seems quite simple - Ivan, do you want to take it? Do
> > you want me to take it? I just got approved into Debian and... Well, I
> > am not too busy with the little packages I have ;-)
> Gunnar, I'd be delighted if you want to spend time on this package, I've
> no real use for it myself anymore, its completely trival, and gets
> about 5 emails a year. Mainly it just needs a developer/user if its
> to stay up to date. If you're a dd and you'd like to adopt it, you've
> got my blessing, I'll presume that unlike some you're still current
> with the protocol and know what to do. If you'd like to just NMU and/or
> add yourself as comaintainer, I'm cool with that too.
> Otherwise this package still has a maintainer, thanks for asking...
> (waiting for the NM with enough insight and humor to request email@example.com)