Re: looking for the autogen's maintainer called James R. Van Zandt <email@example.com>
Tamas SZERB <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
[cc'ing to -devel and -private is a bit pointless, so choosing -devel;
personal cc as requested]
>Hello guys, I'm looking for the autogen package's maintainer because of
>several reasons: bugs (mentioned in BTS), and because long
>time ago there wasn't new package but the mainstream's version is VERY
>newer long time ago.. (FYI, major version from 4 to 5 change)
>I wrote him a letter 2 weeks ago, if he cannot maintain the package, I'd
>like continue his work, but there was no answer. I submitted an important
>bug and he didn't answer yet, and I think these problems are SO SERIOUS
>because the package so obsolete and buggy.
There appear to be three open non-forwarded bugs, none very old. Your
grave (not important) bug was submitted *yesterday*, which is not a lot
of notice, and doesn't fit the definition of grave  anyway. Did you
read bug #99470, where the maintainer had a conversation with a bug
submitter and upstream about problems with autogen 5 (your bug, in fact,
so I assume you didn't) less than a week ago?
Perhaps the package could use some work, but the maintainer hardly seems
 "makes the package in question unusable or mostly so, or causes data
loss, or introduces a security hole allowing access to the accounts
of users who use the package"
Colin Watson [email@example.com]