[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: NM non-process



Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org> writes:

> * Goswin Brederlow (brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de) [030806 05:35]:
> > Kalle Kivimaa <kalle.kivimaa@iki.fi> writes:
> > > BTW, has anybody done any research into what types of package
> > > maintainers tend to go MIA? I would be especially interested in a
> > > percentage of "old" style DD's, DD's who have gone through the NM
> > > process, people going MIA while in the NM queue, and people going MIA
> > > without ever even entering the NM queue. I'll try to do the statistics
> > > myself if nobody has done it before.
> 
> > And how many NMs go MIA because they still stuck in the NM queue after
> > years? Should we ask them? :)
> 
> Many. While cleaning up the ITPs/RFPs I asked many packagers about the
> status of their package and got quite often a "package is more or less
> ready, but I'm waiting of DAM-approval because I don't want the hassle
> of another sponsored package", or, what's worse a "package was ok some
> time ago, but as Debian doesn't want me I stopped fixing it".
> 
> Sad.

Till this morning I was one of those NMs not wanting the hassel of a
sponsor but now I had to change my maintainers email and fix some RC
bugs so I did bully someone to sponsor it.

You wait 5 Month for the DAM and thus one should become DD any day
now. Would you realy go hunting for a sponsor again? Now that I did I
probably become DD tomorrow so it was a waste of time. .oO( Damn, now
I jinxed become DD too again ).

MfG
        Goswin



Reply to: