Discussion: wnpp and ITPs
Recently (Nov. 2nd) I checked wnpp web page,
and it has 890 reports then.
Here are some numbers:
(no subject) 1
The oldest ITP is 4 years and 165 days old.
Number of ITPs:
older than 1 year: 56
301 - 355 days old: 48
251 - 300 days old: 40
201 - 250 days old: 44
151 - 200 days old: 56
101 - 150 days old: 45
51 - 100 days old: 76
1 - 50 days old: 104
Large number in recent 50 days is no problem.
They are supposed to be worked on, and we will
have more packages soon.
But ITPs older than 6 months might be too long
to wait for, isn't it ?
It seems that we will have more and more longer
living ITPs if we don't have some solution here.
I don't know what should be done exactly. But
I'm afraid that we may have many problems around
forgotten (sub-marine) ITPs or duplicate ITPs
unless we make the wnpp page more easily readable.
(I've heard the purpose of ITP procedure is to
avoid the duplicate work and waste of resources.
So duplicate ITPs are ridiculous. Perhaps We
should note that ITP is NOT the reserve of rights,
An idea is to split wnpp into a few types, such as
ITP/ITA(now working!) and O/RFA(need help!) in order
to make it short and more easily readable with slow
connections. Perhaps we also need to add UTP(unable
to package) category.
Another idea is to introduce "expire" period in
ITP/ITA so that we can clear up the obsoleted
or forgotten declaration.
There may be more smart solution which I can't think
Taketoshi Sano: <firstname.lastname@example.org>,<email@example.com>,<firstname.lastname@example.org>