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

Re: New maintainer behaviour with NMU and LogJam's hijacking

On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 03:19:10PM -0500, Ari Pollak wrote:
> Regardless, I will try to follow Debian policy in the future in this 
> capacity.  I would also like to extend apologies and a  suggestion to 
> Christian, in that if you do not have time to keep up with maintenance 
> of a package, it would be much appreciated if it was put up for adoption 
> or orphaned so that another developer with the proper resources to 
> maintain the package will to so. 

Right. But you could also offer your help and I could be very happy.
Your "pings" seemed to be annoying requests (if you think about your one
line mail and your bug report for a new release the same day logjam 4
has been released... :) ) and not an help offer. What about saying "hi,
I'd like to maintain or help you with logjam", or "I have new
ready packages here: <URL>". It's another way to collaborate". :)

> If you wish to continue working on 
> logjam, I would be happy to volunteer as a backup maintainer if he is 
> backlogged for some time, so that the package is properly kept 
> up-to-date and bug-free.

You are following in a good way its development and I can only be happy
if logjam can be "fully" maintained. So, good work! ;-)

Apologies again from me because of my lack of responsibility for the
work on logjam package. 
I wanted to put this question under discussion because I think we can
always have better way to work... for us and for the whole Project.


Christian Surchi, csurchi@debian.org, christian@firenze.linux.it |   ICQ     
www.debian.org - www.softwarelibero.it - www.firenze.linux.it    | 38374818
Software production is assumed to be a line function, but it is run
like a staff function. -- Paul Licker

Reply to: