Re: Ideas about allowing Co-maintainer
* Petter Reinholdtsen (firstname.lastname@example.org) [030814 11:50]:
> Your idea could be considered if there are packages with lots of open
> bugs were patches are included, and the maintainer are just ignoring
> these. Then the package should probably be hijacked or just NMUed.
> As far as I know, there are not many packages like that.
There are even important packages that didn't release for some time
and have bugs with patches for some time. These packages are also the
most difficult ones for handling. Hijacking an unimportant package
(with the appropriate procedure of course) is not difficult; hijacking
an important package where the maintainer is also a important person
is something I personally certainly can't do. So, this discussion
seems me not to be about optional packages, but of important and other
PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C