Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Does he (/she) have specific objections to the patch?
>
> Or is it just a not-invented-here attitude?
I doubt that aj is being territorial about ifupdown, given that
a) the last 4 releases (and all releases since 2001) were NMUs
b) he made some witty remark at DebConf about this
c) aj instituted the NMU early, NMU often policy in general
I was going to say the same thing about debootstrap, but after 34 (!!)
consecutive NMUs over a 1 year period, aj made a maintainer release, and
then added the lead NMUer to the maintenance team. And then it got NMUed
again. Well, this is at least an interesting way to get co-maintainers
for base packages.
> I've seen a *lot* of complaints about territorialism by Debian package
> maintainers. ("No, this is my package! I won't give it up! I am still
> maintaining it!", even when it hasn't built from source for a
> year.) Can anyone think of an institutional way to address this? I
> can't offhand, but I'm sure someone is smarter than me. :-D
Reduced requirements for NMUs, plus the tendency to see any package with
3 or more NMUs at the top of its changelog over a period of 1+ month as
effectively either oprhaned or maintained by whoever is really doing the
work.
--
see shy jo
Attachment:
pgpYOE9RKP1UO.pgp
Description: PGP signature