On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 12:17:11PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 02:08:15PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > > If the QA folks get bored maintaining some packages, it'd make sense > > to remove them, but if they're actually being maintained, even without > > a proper Maintainer, it doesn't make so much sense. > I didn't say the packages Matej's uploaded should be immediately removed, > just that we shouldn't be encouraged to sit and wait for months until > someone got bored enough to fix them and upload Which is nice, but it doesn't say what we _should_ do. The trivial sorts of metrics, like "non-free, orphaned, buggy and hasn't been touched for a year", don't work, since QA _is_ actually active enough to make that not actually happen. If you want more complicated metrics, you'll need to work out some good ones, and find some way of regularly applying them... > (did you see his changelog entry? gross!). There's been a dozen... Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <email@example.com> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.''
Description: PGP signature