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

Re: Work-needing packages report for Sep 6, 2002



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: pgpdtm5qggHPV.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: