On Wed, 18 May 2005, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 12:19:50PM -0500, Micah Anderson wrote: > > At what point would it be appropriate to begin to actively maintain > > syslog-ng? > > It's been 'only' a few months since nothing has been heard -- I've added > your hint now to the MIA database for later followup, and will orphan > when no reaction is forthcoming after a number of pings, so that you can > take over. Thanks, as I have mentioned a couple times to both the maintainer and the co-maintainer, I would be happy to give syslog-ng the attention it deserves, so when orphan time comes, let me know so I can do some work on it. So that I might have an idea for planning my work-load, what time frame are you talking about? > > For sarge, this is all just not relevant anyway, so there is no great > hurry, and for urgent stuff one can NMU. I'd typically suggest to just > be a bit patient after making sure QA/MIA knows about it (I now know), > to prevent cases of premature hijacking. No, it is not important now for sarge, although I would have preferred to get the more stable version into sarge before the freeze. I have performed a NMU on syslog-ng to fix a security bug already. I sent this message because I did not want to prematurely hijack. It is my understanding that the process is to attempt to contact the maintainer a couple times, then if no response, contact debian-devel to see if anyone else knows. This is why I am here. > Thanks for noticing and taking care for now of syslog-ng! No problem, I noticed because I make heavy use of syslog-ng and there are many bugs that I think can be easily fixed. Micah
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature