On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 04:21:06PM -0400, Clint Adams wrote: > > MIA maintainers are another issue that needs to be dealt with, but this > > should be orthogonal. OTOH, if we don't care that a package is > > maintained, then the MIA issue is moot. > Is he MIA if he's not missing? The point is that just because a package > is on the WNPP list as orphaned doesn't mean it's unmaintained, and just > because a package isn't doesn't indicate how well it's maintained, if at > all. Then this is a QA/maintainer accountability problem that ought to be addressed, rather than using it as an excuse for keeping packages in the archive when there's no individual willing to have his name in the Maintainer: field. Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpXWN1FydvdK.pgp
Description: PGP signature