Re: Is Petr Cech <email@example.com> MIA?
On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 11:23:51PM +0300, Lior Kaplan wrote:
> The NMU is very simple... I don't have a problem with doing it myself in
> a week or two.
> Just try to catch Petr first.
Eh, (1) there is a standing 0-day NMU policy for very long already (at
least half a year, don't remember even), (2) two weeks definitely is too
late, I suggest NMU'ing ASAP, (3) no need to start the "MIA procedure"
thingy when just doing a NMU, everyone gets busy once in a while, a NMU
is not a bad thingy, just an attempt to help out a maintainer who
otherwise apparantly couldn't find the time to fix a particular issue.
As #288741 is 120 days old without maintainer reaction, there was
already ample opportunity for Petr to explain why there is a delay etc.
Speaking as the person handling MIA issues for QA, I do note that NMU's
and MIA are mostly not dependent on eachother, and especially that both
can and should be done in parralel in case there seem to be problems.
NMU's are for fixing particular bugs, and are generally a good thing
when maintainers don't get around to fixing that particular bug for
whatever reason, while asking MIA (firstname.lastname@example.org) is done in order
to get the Maintainer: field changed to reality -- "Missing In Action",
it appears the maintainer isn't working on a particular package/debian
in general. As NMU's can be handled by the maintainer later, but a
Maintainer: change cannot, the latter is being done with much more
prudence and hence can (and will) take much longer time.
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
Jeroen@wolffelaar.nl (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)